Around Orange County and the inland empire, but in l. A. Itself, do you have a goal of what you think is reasonable to sign up over the next year or so . Im striving for 220,000. You are. If that takes us a series of years, so be it, but were putting rhettthe resources behind this. It pays us back many times over. It makes business sense first and foremost but it also makes ethical sense. You alluded to this before but cities may intervene on the other side . Were looking to have a lot of other cities who stepped up saying they want to be a part of it, too. We dont have, quote unquote, local government or the federal part of the government saying were against this because if just a few voices decided to challenge, we think we can get a coalition of cities much larger and that is an important counterbalance for any court. They may win this first round judging by what ive heard from the court its in but it will be appealed, of course. As its being appealed, its very important for americans to speak up and speak out and for cities to be the voice of all americans. Are you confident that ultimately the federal government does have the authority to do i think so and again, in political terms, i think history is on our side. If we need to see the progress come through changes in laws as well as at the federal level, its only a matter of time because it makes sense across the board. Seven out of the top ten in this country were started by immigrants. I gave you the stats of 40 of our businesses in the city of l. A. If we become antiimmigrant or shutting off that valve, i was sharing with you the story. I just came back from asia. And when i was in seoul, when i was in tokyo when i was in different cities in china, they were all asking how can we get more diversity . They realize this is important for competition in the Global Economy today. We cant afford a competition thats backwards, saying how do we, you know, keep these people on the fringes, because theyre not going anywhere theyre going to be here. We need to embrace that diversity, figure out a way to incorporate it and see the population grow in the United States. Two final things and then ill bring in the audience. You mentioned the goal here really is citizenship in the end, not just legal status. And that will require legislation. Do you think this executive action in the long run is bringing us closer or further away from a legislative consensus on immigration . No question i think that it is bringing us closer. To use the metaphor from before, gay marriage civil unions the sky didnt fall. It was a necessary first step though not the ultimate goal. As i joked with friends, whats going to happen when gay marriage goes through, nothing. Thats the point. The world didnt change. Gay couples got married, straight couples got married. I think in immigration, any steps we can take forward will show that it gets a little bit better, not worse so what do we have to fear . The arguments that this is somehow going to be corrosive to our economy has not borne out. I think this helps us get to the steps of citizenship, and i think being able to bring people fully into citizenship, dont ask if tell us how. Because the alternative is something that this country cant afford. The status quo is completely broken for all of us that deal with it. And we need you to be a part of that solution instead of just saying what youre against. Thats the challenge, i think for this congress. Thats the challenge for immigration opponents that are out there right now. Its unamerican but im very hopeful that well move closer to it. Does the magnitude matter . You have the house voting last week to block it. Probably the majority of the senate will vote to block it. Practically every candidate in 2016 will vote to repeal the executive action. Does the number of people who get signed up between now and then assuming it goes forward, is that a significant variable do you think on whether this stays in place . Its an important variable but the question i then have to answer is, okay if you dont like if the president didnt have the power to do this will you do it legislatively . And you as a president will you sign that in . I dont think the white house, this was their preferred mode of option. I think its a question the American People will be asking any candidate and any party what are you doing to fully integrate now my cousins my neighbors, my coworkers . This is no longer something in which people dont know who these folks are. I think increasingly people recognize who they are. The importance, you know when you meet a dreamer who has been a straight a student, only known the United States, gets a scholarship to go to a Wonderful University and cant afford it because theres no financial aid, where do we expect that individual to go and why wouldnt our Company Benefit . I guess im wondering about the challenge of the supporters of the policy, the cities the advocacy groups, the neighborhood groups. If there are millions of people signed up, is this more likely to endure than if there are hundreds . Absolutely. Once people are in there it becomes an advocacy group. Most of the citizens here are legal and not citizens and people who dont have any documentation in single families. I think you have a huge constituency. Once people get in the system, they should be able to, in full trust and faith be able to see the end of that as well. Lets bring in the audience for a couple questions. Over here . I stood up here. It was interesting and thank you for being here today. Very enlightening. A lot of questions but ill boil it down to two. Having covered this issue for many years, i realize there is a great deal of fear and its not just fear from the government or fear of the government or fear of your neighbor, but when you line up and youve seen people cross the rio grande and theyre being he canexploited by the coyotes trying to bring them over there is a fear now there will be an expectation in the neighborhoods as this comes to pass. How do you deal with that . Thats the first question. And then the second one is i run two newspapers and three web sites and i can tell you on any given day if im not tweeting or im not involved in social media, im doomed. So how do you take this message to social media and deal with the naysayers who, as a man once wiser than me said a lot will make it around the world before the troops puts its boots on. How do you deal with that information in the internet age . Social media is not one world, its a lot of worlds that exist unto themselves sometimes. I think its important not to lose all of our focus and spend all of our time rebutting arguments from folks who may not ever change their minds, but using social media to reach people who need help. Thats what were primarily using social media for in local languages to reach out and find people and say come on in. We have the citizenship centers. We have folks who know this and can answer your questions, et cetera. To the first piece, i think youre right. Its a very fair point that anybody who is pro immigration or pro citizenship in this argument has to have their hearts break when they see the situation on the border and cant have an open border. Like for those children i wouldnt tell any kid who is in Central America or mexico by yourself, go try and cross that border. Youre putting your life on the line, people looking to be exploited, et cetera. So having a Strong Border is very important with a path to citizenship. Those actions to me are very meaningful as someone who is progressive on these issues and wants to see people not be exploited. What we do in our towns once they get there, i think its very important to create relationships directly between Law Enforcement and the immigrant community. Los angeles has really led the way. Before the present chief, bill brat bratton, if you come into contact with a police officer, were not just going to ask for your documentation status and send you to ice for no other reason. Not because of a criminal action but just because of that. We want people to testify, we want them to be witnesses we want them to come and report crimes. And we have a very good working relationship with immigrant communities who trust our police department. That wasnt always the case, but they do now, which makes our streets safer, which helps to solve a lot of crimes and which helps them feel a part of civic life, too. Over here. Question . Hi. Peggy chorowski, a lifetime californian. I agree, the hispanic communities who are here illegally is going to benefit tremendously from this. But i got a different perspective on immigration when i came here to d. C. , and that is a lot of jobs that especially blacks used to do in this town especially construction, have been completely taken over by latino contractors who often use illegal workers and underbid the black contractors. Ive talked to many ive interviewed them. I appreciate your pollyannaish view about the good, but there is no doubt that illegals do take jobs, and when can you how can you face that . Every person i talk to who is going to benefit from this, their first thing they say is theyre going to go get a better job than they have now. So who is going to do all those jobs that Americans Still do . With all respect, i dont think its very pollyannaish its very practical and ive done a lot of research on this. To your question in the Construction Trade and its very important not to conflate that every latino is an undocumented immigrant. Not to say that some dont, but thats in a lot of industries. What weve done in los angeles, and in the hotels there was a lot of employment, so we worked very consciously on an Apprenticeship Program and went into South Los Angeles and worked with the building trade unions to bring what is now about 3 or 40,000 africanamericans who werent becoming plumbers, electricians carpenters et cetera to go specifically into that. We found on the work site in los angeles, if people didnt speak spanish, sometimes they couldnt get onto those jobs. Recognizing that issue, weve taken people on brought people in. Same thing with our Hotel Industry where we saw a lot of africanamericans no longer in those positions. We worked with unite here, other unions, and weve consciously drawn people now to learn those trades become apprentices and get in there with quite good success. There are ways to deal with whatever issues come up with this. I think its just simplistic to say, quote unquote, illegals take jobs. People who are here want to work. And i think thats great. We want hardworking people no matter what their color no matter what their religion, no matter what their background, and i think there are ways to be able to do it. Next question. First of all thank you so much for coming all wait overthe way over to the west coast. We appreciate you spending time with us today. Hard to argue in january. Just a brief question. Pretty simple, straight to the point. Do you feel that individuals who are applying for citizenship should require to learn english . I do. I support that. I think thats a good thing for us to be able to have. I think it is the language of success. I think it caps every generation. Youll have folks that come even from their teens or early 20s and by the time they die, their primary language will still be lithuanian or whatever. But i think its a good idea and something we can do. People want to. Ive never met in my interactions immigrants who dont want to learn english, but can they work it into their two jobs, do we have the adult schools to allow that . Its a big focus on us in los angeles and our adult schools to provide those classes and in the office of international affairs. Good evening, im representing taylor networks. Thank you for being with us. This may seem a little elementary, and i do apologize as i know we typically dont air White Elephants in the room or in public. But do you think america could benefit at all from going back to immigration, period, and reviewing it as a whole as to really if we want to relegate who are immigrants and who are native do you think we could benefit at all from retaking that course and even going back to reviewing whether Christopher Columbus even actually discovered the land, what happened with the indians so forth and so on, that we could actually get an education that would then allow all of us to make an informed decision as to comments, behaviors and actions that relate to immigration said Civil Services and otherwise . I think you make a great point. We should all know our history before we say who was brought here willfully who was brought here unchained, who was brought here forcefully and when did they i am great themselves . I love the line that no one actually originally came here even those who were originally here 10,000 years before anybody else. I think thats important, but i think we can sometimes get so caught up in the history piece back and forth about who is right and who is wrong that we forget to solve the practical problems. I love history. I love trying to untangle the morality. We all have blood on our hands and weve all been victimized. I think everybody can lay claim in some ways to both. What is american is not only where you came from but where do you want to go who do we want to be . We see industrialized nations struggling with population growth. Like japan and korea, the same thing, when we have an asian population and folks being brought up in a low birth rate. The focus in the United States has always been immigration, to keep the economy growing to see innovation happening. Why should we have students and as soon as they invent something then say start your business anywhere but america. So i think going back to that could inform the future, but i appreciate you bringing that up. Can i ask you real quick, what these californians are considering would be to extend the medical program to the undocumented. Would you support that . Absolutely. We wind up paying an emergency room. Preventative care is always cheaper than what we pay. Same argument on homelessness, for instance, when folks say we cant afford to house the homeless and i say one individual costs thousands of dollars when they have to go into a hospital or nursing home. One final question. Going back to your original question in terms of Economic Impact. What do you see the Economic Impact of the executive action and potentially eventually comprehensive Immigration Reform, on housing, for example . Ownership, specifically. Thank you for that too. Los angeles is now unfortunately, the least affordable city in the country or the region. Its not the highest rents. You can find them other places but given wages and rents, that gap. We want people to earn more money. We want them to be able to start businesses legally. We have a Record Number of jobs we think, in los angeles but not a Record Number of payroll jobs. A lot of those are either people starting their own things or off the books and we need to bring people onto the books. That gives me more money to pave my roads, to hire more Police Officers, to have paramedics. So the economic effects the 2 million we estimate, but its also an effect on my city. I cant afford to have immigration of immigrants because we have to pay for that. Its the same thing as poverty wages. We often say, lets not raise the minimum wage and then we all pay for it anyway, in the emergency room or food stamps. When people arent home, we have afterschool programs we pay for. Lets find a way for people to become citizens get a decent wage, have access to housing and even home ownership. Thats the american dream. Thats what im fighting for every single day in l. A. And i know my colleagues are around the country. You give us a lot to think about. Thank you for being here. [applause] thank you so much mayor garcetti, for joining us. Our next panel is new faces, new places, a conversation with mayors. And joining rahm on stage are the honorable steve hogan, mayor of aurora, colorado the honorable ralph becker mayor of salt lake, utah and the honorable tom tate, mayor of anaheim, california. Joining ron on stage is amy sullivan correspondent and director of next Economy Program which will help moderate. I will turn it over to you. Hi, amy. Welcome, mayors. Let me start and amy and i will kind of take turns grilling you, but let me start with a point we discussed with mayor garcetti, which is although there are a few big cities that have undocumented immigrants which would be potentially eligible for executive action. In fact, the best estimates from the migration policy is this is substantially dispersed much more than, for example under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. They only account for 40 of the total pool of the eligible population. There is a lot of people out there. Orange county with anaheim, estimate of 150,000 people. Suburban denver 41,000 Salt Lake County 22,000. When we get beyond chicago and new york and l. A. Is the infrastructure in place to work through this process in cities of your size . Mayor . I think the short answer is yes. The city of aurora is about 350,000 people. We are already a city where the caucasians are a minority. 6 asian, 19 africanamerican 28 hispanic, 1 to 2 whatever. That leaves less than 50 caucasian. And its been that way for a while. And we find ways to get things done. We have no choice. The federal government doesnt work. State government is dealing with many of the basic issues that the federal government used to deal with. That leaves local government to do the rest and we think we do it pretty well. Certainly in Salt Lake City, we certainly wish we had the resources of a larger city like los angeles, but i think were confident that a combination of City Government, nonprofit faithbased organizations, partnerships at the state level that we are pretty well prepared to be able to house our immigrant population and provide for them. Salt lake citiesy is a Refugee Resettlement city. We have 50,000 resettlement and several languages in our city. We are dealing with folks in poverty or who come to our country or come to Salt Lake City in need. It is a remarkably giving society and community where. Were the Number One Service volunteer state in the country. We feel we can address this. Were anxious to welcome new citizens into our community. And how do you feel . Anaheim is the largest city in Orange County. About 350,000. Very ethnic. 70 ethnic, i think 55 latino 20 asian. Were the largest american air populations in the United States. We were listening to mayor garcetti and thinking man, hes got a lot of resources, a lot of formalized stuff going on. We just get things done. Basically weve been doing it in our city. We treat people as people, and regardless of status. If people if there is a crime thats being committed, our Police Officers go and it doesnt matter whether theyre here legally or illegally or documented or undocumented. It doesnt matter. We treat people as people i guess. As far as when these programs start rolling in we rely on a lot of the nonprofits, the charities that do a lot of work with us. Will the city undertake its own effort directly . Dont know. Dont know. We are. Were in the midst of it right now. Probably not, but thats only because were in a fairly unique status. Were actually three different counties and we have five Different School districts so we end up being more of a facilitator. But certainly there are programs that City Government is in charge of, and as was said, we dont care. We just deal with people and make it work. Director of next economy project joining us. Governor i wanted to follow up on what you mentioned and if you could talk about your experience in salt lake with the Mormon Church or the Jesus Christ Church of latterday saints working on the Refugee Program youve had. Because a lot of cities, i know, are feeling some financial strain and will need to lean on some local effectors as this project goes through. Perhaps that could be a model of what youve seen already and maybe what you expect in terms of cooperation from some local people. I think our goal in Salt Lake City is to be as inclusive and welcoming as we possibly can be for everyone who comes to our community. Whether its an immigrant, whether someone is homeless whether someone is wealthy in a new corporation, we really want our folks to feel like we have an inclusive environment. In Salt Lake City and in utah, we went through a fairly unique experience, i think. When the wave of antiimmigration action started to occur in arizona and was literally the wave was sweeping into utah as you might expect the leadership of the state political leadership, certainly the business leadership, the Nonprofit Leadership on every end of the spectrum came together and said, wait a minute, this is not who we are. And over a period of a couple months developed something called the utah compact and said we as a state and as a society want to foster these principles in the way we address immigration. And didnt specify particular legislative solutions but recognized the federal system is broken that we want to support families not separated that we want to take advantage and integrate the prosperity of immigrants coming into our society and a number of other factors and said this is how we want to operate. And it stemmed that tidal wave almost, that was coming over utah, and it is a set of principals that really has served us well in saying, hey, we are a very conservative state, but we do not want to be treating people in a way that is either discriminatory or in a way that is inhumane, or in a way that doesnt recognize the benefits that come from immigration. So that spirit seems to prevail and we have incredibly generous folks both privately and publicly that allow us, i think, to get more things done. We at the city level, thats what were about. We could argue idealogy all we want, but when it comes down to it, its serving our community. Let me ask from your own experience but also looking more broadly in your role as chairman of the task force do you expect any resistance from the state which is a conservative state and i believe is one of the states on the lawsuit. If you are out there trying to implement the executive order do you expect youll face any other state or are there other cities that might face resistance from their governments . There is a continuous resistance in our state. In their sentiments, they are loud and theyre a very strong voice in our state. But so far if youre talking about providing tuition and state tuition benefits, or whether youre talking about providing the basic services that people need i think our state has been pretty welcoming. The litigation that ron in utah joined, to me it seems inconsistent with the kind of spirit we reflected. I think well have to let it play itself out. I deal in a very idealogical realm and may be appeasing certain views, but im not seeing that reflective in the way were taking our actions. Do you think cities will face any meaningful resistance from states, like some of the more skeptical states . Certainly not from california. That would not be high on the list. Im thinking about talking to your colleagues with the task force and so forth. If you look at texas or arizona or florida, some of these other places, we have large concentrations in urban areas that may want to aggressively implement the order. Do you think any of them will face pushback in their states . As mayors, what brings us together is were allowed to deal with issues and solve problems. That is really where the rubber hits the road. We have to deal with this and thats why you have a Bipartisan Group of mayors on the task force. We got a letter signed 150 mayors signed a letter asking for comprehensive Immigration Reform. Also those who come out of the shadows and come to live the american dream. Given that, do you think the president acting on his own here with his executive action, does that move it closer or further away from a comprehensive solution that youve endorsed . I wish it didnt happen because i think it moves it away. It throws in the constitutional argument. Because this is such a big issue, there needs to be a law, and there needs to be a law that everybody can get behind. It would just make it easier. I dont like how it happened. Does this bring us closer or further away to a resolution . I dont think it matters. Again, cities have to deal with whatever the result is, and well deal with it. Whether it relates to Police Relationships with minority communities, whether its drivers licenses, whether its lurchl programslunch programs in the summer when school isnt in session, it doesnt matter. We as a city will deal with it. Honestly i wish it was taken care of but well deal with it whatever the result is because we dont have a choice. There is no government under City Government. We have to do it. And if defense cant do it or the state cant do it, well do it. On behalf of the National League of cities, this has been an issue the National League has been involved in and setting and vetting within cities for well over a decade. And when the president made his announcement, we were there the next day saying, we support the action. Because it does begin to address the cities. We Wish Congress had taken action, but with congress not having taken action weve supported comprehensive Immigration Reform. This helps us do our jobs better in cities. Im curious to know how each of you has been thinking about this and anticipating the process Going Forward in the next few months in terms of the on the ground consequences or changes you might be able to see. Im hoping for congress to get together and pass a law that can being signed by the president. That would be the best way of that happening. Short of that, again, same thing the mayor said well just deal with whatever comes our way. Our job is to serve the people in our city regardless of legal status. So well just keep on doing what we do. Given the large number of people in your community who are eligible, do you think that will make a difference in terms of the character of your community, in terms of economics the local economy . Anaheim probably has 50 60,000 undocumented folks. This would affect maybe 30,000. If it helps them, thats all a good thing. It would be better if it helped all the folks. I kind of forgot your question there. I just want to know what the practical consequences will be for anaheim. I think the practical consequences are that it will help help thethe number of people in anaheim. If you think of People Living in Salt Lake City or anaheim, whats going to change in a positive way and are there any negative outcomes . A backlash any backlash you expect if, in fact this does go forward . Well certainly someone who is currently illegal, undocumented, if they are legal that changes a great deal. Attitude if nothing else. Not quite as afraid of being stopped for a traffic light. Not being as afraid when you go into a store to buy something and somebody asks for identification. So that will be a good thing. That will be a good thing on a general psyche. I find it difficult to identify any bad things. I mean the people are already there. They are already living every day. They are already working whenever wherever theyre working. They need help. We find ways to help. I think its going to be a challenge for us. This is not an easy process for us to help members of our Community Work through. And were gearing up to try to find how we can best help people. Well have forms in english and in spanish but Community Dialogues and assistance as best we can provide it, and were reaching out with our other partners really Many Organizations within the city and within the salt lake region. But i tell you what concerns me most is the cloud hanging over the organization. If i come forward does that mean at a future date this might get reversed and i now will be identified and profiled as someone who the government is going to come after . Do you think it could have a meaningful, Chilling Effect on peoples willingness to come forward . Well, something were concerned about. I think well see. Obviously we havent hit the start button yet, and were doing everything we can to try to reach out into the community and invite people in and to provide assistance to people to work through the process. But things were hearing in our Community Today is can we trust the government in the long term . Not just in terms of our immediate actions, to provide us the security we need to fully be an integrated member of the community and society. Along those lines thinking about anaheim what about doca . Was that a positive experience . Are there lessons you can take from that in trying to implement this . What was the doca experience and what can you learn from it . You know, it was in anaheim, what we do is really work with our nonprofits. I guess im fishing there. We direct people to nonprofits for help and things like that. Thats probably the direction it will take. In midsize cities we dont have a lot of resources. Our resources are spent on keeping people safe and in rec programs, things like that, and there really isnt a lot left for additional programs. One of the things i was thinking of as ron was asking you to imagine some of the challenges is the fact that this executive action does not do a lot of things. One of the things it doesnt do is provide eligibility for health care, for example for people who are eligible overall. And it strikes me that its possible to kind of set that issue aside when youre just talking about a community of undocumented immigrants. But when you have people who have now been covered by this executive action who are still going without Health Insurance that becomes more of a challenge and an issue for your communities. Im wondering what the possible ways of addressing that might be and whether that does indeed pose a challenge in terms of resources. Again, i think the answer to that, unfortunately, does not lie in cities. We just dont have the authority or the power to solve the problem. We just have the responsibility to deal with the problem. And thats the tough part. In a city like aurora weve got three major hospitals, weve got another one coming on line shortly. I hope. Its a va hospital. A. Hospital, you never know. But well find ways through the nonprofit community, through the faithbased community, through our own programs that we can put in place, and Mental Health area to try to get services to people. But we cant change the law that says youre going to get Health Insurance. We cant do that part. We can just deal with whats on the ground. I wasnt suggesting changes to the law. I guess it was more as an interim measure. How do you provide health care to, you know thousands of people who are eligible for Health Insurance . Were doing that now. If someone shows up in an emergency room they get treated. And its a very expensive way to provide health care, and so to us, and im speaking regionally now, not just at Salt Lake City, if we can find a way to better manage our Health Care Costs and provide Better Health care, were all better off as a community and as a society. So to me in a way, with this executive order it may not change health care, but its not that were not providing health care today, its just a very expensive way were providing in some instances, and if we can find a better way to do it, we should. California is exploring and has discussed a change in the law. What do you think about the idea of making undocumented eligible for the state Medicaid Program . I think its very reasonable. As people are being treated already, of course and it seems like i think it would be reasonable. Do you see it as a bridge too far politically, that there might be a backlash, even in california on that or not . Probably somewhat. But i think people in california understand that there is a problem that needs to be solved. It might not be the way Everyone Wants to solve it, but obviously people need to have health care, medical care. Theyre getting it already somehow. The hospitals are treating everybody who comes as they should. So this provides some sort of framework. Do you have maybe one more or do you want to bring in the audience . Lets bring in the audience for questions. Two microphones one on each side. I didnt introduce myself earlier, but im brian careman, two papers here in maryland and prince georges county, maryland. He said something about the court brief being filed. Are your three cities a part of that brief and if not, why not . Salt lake city signed on just today. That action is something that very candidly i had not heard anything about until today, so thats something ill have to go back and talk with my city council about. We most likely will not be. The Council Voted not to support the action before it happened. I think there needs to be a law passed, and i dont know if this actually helps us get closer to that or not. Over here. Thank you all for being here. Im not sure if any of the mayors are republicans, but my question is, for you or for your republican colleagues, is it more difficult to take an outreach view to new americans because of pressure from the National Republican party . Im a republican and the answer is no. I mean, ive been out front in the community and politically in terms of statements to the press, appearing at meetings. Ive had numerous other republicans in colorado along with me. Im not alone and there is no pressure no. Im also a republican. I felt a little pressure. Ive chaired the Immigration Task force for the u. S. Conference of mayors trying to get a comprehensive Immigration Reform. No one has ever called me on that or objected. Can i ask a different version of that, broaden the question but with a similar kind of theme for our two republican mayor colleagues . On the other hand by the way, im a democrat. The reality is in todays politics, most urban areas do lean democratic. Most mayors are democratic. Most republicans in the house represent places that are less dense, less urbanized and in many ways less likely to be dealing directly with the ontheground effects of this demographic change and in particular, the immigration issue. Leaving aside the question of pressure for you not to be where you are, do you find in the Republican Party less sensitivity, less urgency about solving the problem because many of the people in office are simply representing communities that are less affected by it . I think a lot of it has to do there arepb] two issues a path to citizenship or nationalization. The other is the border. Probably the Republican Party may be focused on the border first, but the fact is they both have to happen. Otherwise the problem will continue and continue until the border is somewhat unsecure. I found that my republican colleagues, so many agree with me. They know people who come to this country who want a better life, to work. Why would we want those people not to be part of this country . I think to a certain extent it also depends on where youre talking about. For example, in aurora, eight of the 11 City Council People are republicans. But if you turn it around 12 of the 14 state representatives and state senators are democrats. And thats the same city. We had a congressman who engaged his opponent in a debate this last election entirely in spanish. So its not as unusual perhaps in colorado. He was one of the few who voted against mike hoffa, youre referring to in aurora. The vast majority of house of republicans did vote not only to block the new executive order but to overturn doca as well. And he voted the other way, but only 26 voted not to turn over doca. That experience that he is representing is very important than most of his colleagues. Even in colorado you think about republicans at the federal level, more rural areas dominant there. Do you find kind of a gap in discussion perception about what this issue is . I think there probably is a gap, but again, i dont have time to worry about it. Im busy trying to deal with whats going on on a daily basis on the ground. And im im going to do what i think is right for my city and the residents of my city. And ill worry about the niceties of the political philosophy later. Youre in the opposite situation. Youre kind of the island in a very different statewide politics. Beautiful island, yeah. Talk about the difference between your community where some of this is more immediate and perhaps other places where its more matter of belief, principal, idealogy . We deal on the ground with serving everyone in our community, making everyone feel protected, making people want to participate in our community in a lot of ways and equal opportunity. And that is a very different dynamic than the idealogical discussions we see going on in this city, and i walk out of meetings with members of my congressional delegation who i really enjoy personally and know, and i kind of shake my head. Its like, thats not the world im lifrg in. And i have to respect them. Theyre elected like i am, but its like, are you representing the same constituent sometimes . Washington seems like a very faroff place when these kinds of discussions go on compared to the everyday world we live in and cities. So the question we asked mayor garcetti before and maybe ask each of you, if in fact, this does go forward. Lets assume the arguments carry and it is not blocked for litigation, congress is not going to be able to block it. If it does go forward mayor tait said he thinks it will not disclose a legislative solution because you have this added layer about the presidency. But if in fact, 7,000 people are granted legalization in his presidency presidency, do you think it adds more to the Obama Presidency . I wish i could say i have confidence in congress ability to act. But i do think it moves us closer to bringing more people into the full ability to be part of our community. And if we get half of the Problem Solved and it rolls over into the next congress maybe the next congress will take it up. But in the meantime hopefully well have more people in our community who are paying more taxes and contributing more economically and having more opportunity through school and through the normal parts of our society. And mayor, if all those things happened more opportunity, paying taxes participating in school, owning homes. Do you think its practical to take it away at a later date . Do you think that could happen or not . No, its not practical to take it away. But again whatever happens happens. Mayors are pretty progress makt. We will deal with it and well find a way no matter what to make our individual communities better. Amy, do you want to yeah. I guess im curious talking about members of your states delegations who may or may not understand the pressures that youre under, what you would ask them for in terms of support. What can they do to help with you this . I would think Congress Needs to get together and pass Immigration Reform some kind of comprehensive reform. You need to get the entire country behind it. You dont have to worry about it being overturned in courts down the road in litigation, and this uncertainty of the current situation, people who live in anaheim, a big issue in our city is trust. We want to build a trust with our police department, with our city. If there is a question of whether they will be able to stay here or even with this executive action, its hard to build up the trust. Were the ones who have to deal with this. So when you do those conversations that leave you scratching your head a little bit, what could washington do to make this easier for you short of comprehensive . I dont know short of comprehensive reform what they can do. Picking up pieces obviously president obama has chosen that course, and we can agree or disagree with him, but hes not saying, as the rest of us arent saying, we dont need a comprehensive solution. Because if you pick up different pieces of it whether its Border Security or dealing with health care or dealing with the dreamers, youre still leading a good segment of our population thats living in our communities today unaddressed in terms of their status and in terms of their community being part of the community. We want our residents to feel like theyre in a secure place. We have a question over here. Quick question. Ive been a School Principal for many, many years and what weve done when other students are coming from other places with other languages, they would help our kids to learn those languages while our kids in english would help them to learn english. And thats been ive ive been a principal in three or four different places. It seems to work and theyre learning english and were learning spanish or chinese or whatever. That happens all the time in aurora. Our five School Districts have students from over 130 Different Countries who speak human 140 different languages at home. Thats life. I was in a class of kindergarten students about two weeks ago who were learning chinese. Mandarin and they were responding to the teacher in mandarin. The teacher was a volunteer. We have that kind of community. Its all free right . Yes. If i wanted to ask for something, i want more resources with fewer strings. I can sure find a good way to put it to use. It will help the entire community. Because of the missionary tradition, you have an unusually large number of people who are fluent in a second language. What role if any does that play in helping the community . Its a huge role. We have this interpreter base we saw at the olympics and everyday it provides great benefit. Like at aurora we have over 100 languages spoken in our schools. Dual emergent programs, this continuous cross fertilization that provides strength in our community. Our challenge is resources. The societal i do from icdynamic has changed. Were not adapting, the educational system both taking full advantage of all these cultures in our community but we also arent providing the resources for a kids, maybe a refugee doesnt know how to flush a toilet much less being able to walk into a school with a new language and new culture. In terms of the breath of change were going through im guessing aurora and anaheim are the majority of the kids of color in all likelihood. I know its true in Salt Lake City as well. It is. That must be something in Salt Lake City a little bit to wrap their heads around. It certainly is at the state level. In Salt Lake City, were so accustomed to it and so enjoy it, in s italt lake city its not an issue. At the state level its a pretty good gap. You look at the state legislature particularly white male and elderly, theyre a generation apart from whats happening in Salt Lake City but increasingly throughout the state. Sorry. He asked two questions so i was going to ask two questions too. My question is what do you feel an appropriate time is for the pathway to citizenship . Id like to hear each of your individual responses. I ask this because i lived and worked independent oklahoma for a while and had some friends in the legal system there and had clients who would be in this system for 10 to 15 years before they were granted citizenship. It was an issue a lot of times on the end of administration, paper work being lost, sometimes names changed four comfort last name a lot of paper work problems and not necessarily were they qualified and sincere and ernest in that process. Im curious from me to you, what do you feel is an appropriate period of time for that pathway to positionship . Did you take a position in the letter how long . No. We didnt address that in the letter. I dont have a strong opinion on that other than there should be one. I guess you can debate whether they should wait behind everyone else who applied legally or not. From a city point of view, people need a path to citizenship. Its not good to have two classes of people ever. Whether its it should be certainly shouldnt be forever. Lets put it that way. The sooner the better. I dont know a specific time frame. I know the executive order suggests a certain time frame. Certainly, we need to provide people to go through a process where their criminal background is checked, we know the condition and the ability of people to live within our society. But this is part of the federal broken immigration system. You know, i know people today who are trying to work their way through the process following all the legal channels having every cleared pathway and trying to become a citizen and it is a complete mess today. Some of it is just inefficiency of a bigger government bigger agency, some of it is just outdated mechanisms while everyone is in a stand still waiting for congress to do something. Mayor. Im not sure i can add anything to what was already said. I dont know whats the magic number. I do know it should not be any faster than someone who is going through the established legal processes, shouldnt be any faster than that, but how much longer it should be i dont know. We only have a couple minutes left. Let me ask one final question going back to the schools a moment ago. You were all talking in a very positive way the enriching effect of having so many different cultures in the schools and so many different languages. There are challenges as well having that many different languages spoken at home. To what effect do you feel the schools at this point, particularly places not historically dealt with a lot of diversity, are capable of coping with this enormous call lied scopic change in School Districts across the country. I will say in Salt Lake City, there is huge desire and equivalent commitment. It is a change in resources. When you have a teacher thats got 25, 30 students in a classroom in elementary scalhool, and theyre trying to provide for diverse circumstances and you add on the layers of culture and language and preparation coming into the School System, it puts really an unfair burden on the teacher. The commitment is there, desire is there resources arent there. I dont want to cast sort of blame, but were struggling with that piece of it. I can tell you from Salt Lake City side, for the very first time in the history of our city we are starting to pour resources into the School System otherwise would be coming to City Government to help address the issues. Final thought. Can i put out a plug . Yes. For something that we just ransom coverage of on next america and our sister project, next economy, a program in d. C. , a Charter School that does two generation education. It was started a decade or two ago by some local leaders in immigrant communities so that they could teach children and teach their parents at the same time, because so many immigrant parents are working jobs with off hours that are actually able to come to school during school hours. Their number one concern about raising their children is the inability to be able to communicate with their childs teachers and to be part of that education, to be able to support them. It has become a way to really kind of speed up the assimilation process, but also tie them into the larger community. All right. With that. Thank you, mayor hogan and beckham and major tate. [ applause ] our next panel will take the stage. Joanna. Today, the u. S. House is expected to take up a bill banning abortion after 20 weeks. At noon eastern members of Congress Join prolife advocates at the annual march for life rally. This years rally marked the 42nd anniversary of the roe versus wade decision legalizeing abortion. We will join this parade at 1 00 p. M. Eastern here on cspan3. Andrew keen author of the internet is note answer how it is being used for companies for their own profit. In the old day, industrial day, people went to factory paid for their labor, worked 9 00 to 5 00 and went home and did what they want with that money. Today, were all working in these factory like google and facebook and twitter. Were unpaid labor working 24 hours a day. Were not rewarded. Its not even acknowledged were creating the value to them. Worse than that were the ones packaged up as the product. What these companies are doing learning more and more about us from our behavior what we publish, from our photographs, our ideas, what we buy and say and dont say. Learning about us, theyre create ing creating this and they are transforming us and repackaging us as the product. So were the ones being sold. Not only are we working for free but then were being sold. Its the ultimate scam the perfect hitchcock movie. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern and pacific on cspans q a. We are live in the capitol hill this morning at the Rayburn Office building where the ex committee holds a hearing on coal and a from coal fired fire plants disposal and storage of that ash. This is the first meeting since they issued rules for disposing of the ash. We have a lot of people here today. I thank my colleagues for being prompt because of the floor schedule. We want to call the hearing to order. Id like to recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. We welcome each of our witnesses and appreciate your willingness to be here today to talk about the final coal ash rule release by the epa in december. We are eager to hear from you and hope mr. Stanislas will provide implementation of the final rule and also address some questions and concerns. We will hear from a number of stakeholders regarding their initial impressions of the final rule and any concerns they may have and discuss the final rule and legislation considered by this committee and floor of the house the last couple of congresses. First, i would like to commend the epa for getting the rule out in time to meet the Court Ordered deadline weighing in at over 700 pages. Im sure that was no small undertaking and in finalizing the rule the agency faced a genuine dilemma. Create and enforce a permanent permit program for cool ash as defined or promulgate selfimplementing standards for coal ash as nonhazardous waste under sub titletitle d. I am pleased to note the epa chose to regulate cool ash under sub title subtitle d so it will be reused like this. Because it did not have the authority to create a permit program for coal ash. It lays out an entirely selfimplementing program enforced through citizens suits and unavoidable lead to an unpredictable array of regulatory interpretations as judges across the country are forced to make extremely Technical Compliance decisions better left to a regulatory agency. The final sets up a dual regulatory program. Encouraging the states to incorporate the requirements into their Solid Waste Management plans. As currently drafted they do not require them to use the requirements. Meaning even if the states adopt the more stringent requirements they must comply with both the state and federal requirements. There are some other provisions in the rule potentially troublesome and we hope to discuss today including the retroactive Retroactive Application of location and impoundments that exceed a Groundwater Protection with no opportunity to remedy the problem through corrective action. Last but not least epa has removed the flexibility of the Correction Action Program as it exists for other programs under subtitle d. It is an understandable that the agency may feel the need to tighten certain restrictions because the rule is selfimplementing. However, removing flexible regarding the boundary within which compliance must be demonstrated and flexibility to determine the appropriate cleanup levels and eliminating costs in the action it jeopardizes the riskbased cleanup decision at the coal ash unit. It also creates uncertainty at the koolcool ash disposal facilities. While we acknowledge the amount of time the epa put into drafting the rule we believe legislative session might be required to set minimum standards and allow states to enforce programs to eliminate the standards we feel could still be the best approach for coal ash. I can assure you we will be thoughtful to the requirements and how they differ from the legislature we move through this committee and the house during the last congress and update the legislation as necessary. As mr. Stan nisislaus pointed out, there are rules we did not address, impoundments and we will address these as we move forward. I would like to thank the administration for all the cooperation on this issue. Epa has been constructive and helpful during the last congress and as we work through the issues with the final rule. We appreciate the issues and thank mr. Mckinley who has been a driving force on this legislation and like to express my appreciation to fellow Committee Members as we continue to push forward with effective legislation of coal ash. With that, i end my time. Let me indicate how pleased i am to work as ranker on this subcommittee with you. I appreciate the suspect our respective parties have asked us to lead the efforts with what i think is very important work that comes in the overview of this subcommittee. I believe we will have a very productive year and session and look forward to it. Congratulations on your continued leadership. Good morning and thank you, chair for holding this meeting and the rule to establish minimum National Standards for disposal of coleal ash. Over the years it has been associated with inadequate management of coal ash disposal. Spills related to coal ash impoundment failures have polluted Water Supplies and resulted in expensive cleanup efforts. I am certain that the residents of these unfortunate communities feel this rule is long overdue. Epa is to be commended for its extensive process of Public Engagement on this issue. They sorted through 460,000 statements submitted during the Public Comment period on the rule and held eight public hearings in communities across our country. Epas rule is responsive to communitys concerns classifies coal ash would arm coal ash recycling efforts in coal ash in new materials and products and is responsive to Public Health and environment advocates. Because for the first time we have standards for the coal ash disposal sites that will set a floor of protection for all communities. Of course, the rule from either Vantage Point is not perfect. Given the despairtive opinions about what would constitute coal ash disposal that has quieted but there are still deferring opinions how coal ash should be classified and regulated and we will hear some of these opinions today. I would have preferred to see a stronger regulation given substantial risk and tremendous damaging costs of recent spills especially the one experienced in tennessee in 2008. With this rule in place, states and utilities can begin to address deficiencies in disposal operations. Communities can access coal dissuspension facilities and have a benchmark for performance against expectations. Now that the work is final the work of implementation begins. Ultimately that this is only test whether this rule takes the correct approach or not and will take some time to find occupant whether the implementation will achieve Safe Management of coal ash disposal. I believe it is this subcommittees job to supplement this issue and others Going Forward. To implement this issue. I think either approach is premature. I would observe changes in regulation or in law do indeed take a long time. Hitting the restart button now would only lead to continued uncertainty and risk. We have had far too much of those already. This rule was years in the making. As i said earlier i would have preferred to see a stronger regulation. Im not willing to secondguess an approach yet to be implemented or evaluated. Once that rests on the extensive public negotiations and process by years invested by the interested parties and the agency. This rule should move forward. We should give this rule an opportunity to work and monitor it and closely evaluate its effectiveness. Lets get on with it. As we go forward we see how well this approach works. We certainly retain all options for actions if it does not. I thank all witness forses for appearing today and their contribution. I thank our chair for calling this forward and look forward to working with you on this issue and our subcommittee as we begin our work in this 114th congress. With that, i yield back. Thank you my colleague for his kind words. Now, id like to yield to the chairman for the full committee, mr. Upton. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Today, our work on the coal ash continues. I want to thank and welcome back our frequent guess epa administrator stanislaus. You worked long and hard on coal ash and always engaged with us very constructively and we appreciate that. Navigating this issue is a tough job and more difficult by gaps in current law. It does not regulate it as Hazardous Material and glad the epa agrees but there is not a state program for nonhazardous waste. When the federal court set a december 13 deadline for epa to publish a final rule for coal ash we looked to see whether the epas rule would be the last word on the subject. We along with other witnesses are asking the sail thing and left with more questions. If we dont legislation, how will epa be enforced . Will there be one for each state, one federal and state based . Can we expect a dramatic increase in citizens disputes. It could lead a path to all sized for greater uncertainty and expense. Mr. Mckinleys bipartisan bill in the last Congress Went a long way with solving challenges of coal ash management. States like michigan were already running successful Disposal Program and allowed states to continue to use their localized regulatory expertise. I appreciate the epas input and asked for changes many of which we made to the bill. Our goal is to get the job done right and willing to address further legislation to ensure we have a workable bill in place. We want to continue to work with both bodies and both parties to achieve the best outcome. We continue to work with the stakeholders coops and other advocates. Our goals are three fold put the right protections in place. Put coal ash generators and users straightforward, standards and procedures to follow and grant states the authority they need to implement and enforce federal standards while taking into account distinct local conditions. Mr. Chairman, with all the innovative ideas and refinement thats gone into the legislation the last couple of years i welcome again to listen to shareholders. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Job creators detest uncertainty. Lets make one thing clear. This proposed regulation does not provide certainty. In this spirit of the super bowl upcoming, let me explain an analogy. If a quarterback knew what defense was going to be put up against him, he knew with certainty what defense he would logarithmically likely be able to move the ball down the field much more easily if he new with center what he faces. This is what provides regulation. It provides no certainty to the Business Community. Let me give you some examples. You already heard the two chairman talk about that. Let me reinforce that again. The rule results in potentially conflicting federal and state requirements. Federal judges in neighboring jurisdictions could make decisions in conflicting compliance. More damages on page 18 of the rule. It says in quote this rule defers a final determination until Additional Information is available. Thats not acceptable. How many times must there be a final determination that coal ash is not hazardous and be handled in a different way. In 112 and 113th congresses the house passed legislation codifying the conclusions rendered in the 93 and 2,000 reports authored by the epa. Were trying to develop certainty. Certainty not just to the Business Community but to the health of the people were trying to protect. And in fact mr. Stanislaus i thank you, we had a very good working relationship. You said the legislation we passed was something you could work with. We want to keep that working relationship going to keep up with certainty. Bottom line, unfortunately we have a regulation that doesnt provide certainty. It would be wise for the committee to once again pass the legislation weve done over the last two years and bring closure to this issue. Thank you and i yield back my time. The gentlemans time has expired. The Ranking Member, mr. Pallone, for the last five minutes. It was nice saying that. Welcome. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I also want to start by congratulating my colleague from new york mr. Tonco cocoamr. Tonco for continuing his work and we appreciate your leadership on environmental issues, paul. Let me turn to the topic today. Id like to commend the epa for nationalize ing nationalizing cool ash disposal that will provide the framework for addressing this serious problem. Unsafe disposal of coal ash address serious waste to human and surroundings and its dust and waste in impoundments and im happy to say it is first addressed in the first rule. It was needed for coal ash in the year 2000. The need for this rules ha only become clearer. We now have 157 documented cases in he human Health Environment from unsafe coal ash disposal. Its possible under this rule that number may go up because it will be detected. This rule is the result of hearings and over 50,000 commenters including state, industry and environmental groups and concerned citizens. It address what this subcommittee has heard in past hearings. Ebola epa addressed the stigma and they addressed state concerns and by requiring public reporting of monitoring data and addressing some legacy sites, epa address many concerns by environmental advocates. Well hear many are not satisfied with the rule and those in the Environmental Community argue only a subtitle c would provide selfhelp and possible the nature of the rule could lead to inconsistent compliance. The rule is a step forward and off offer protection in the environment and not part of past legislative proposals. If you look ahead to the subcommittee, i think this changes our role. Were no longer to set National Criteria and statute because those have been set through a robust transparent process. Instead we have to monitor compliance and implementation structure and hope we can conduct that oversight in a bipartisan manner. I applaud the epa for their hard work and testimony and yield back, mr. Chairman. Gentleman yields back his time. I would like to recognize Matthew Stanislaus from the ebola. You heard from a lot of members and we appreciate the work weve done together and look forward to working for more. You are recognized for five minutes. Good morning. To Ranking Members of the subcommittee. I am Mattie Stanislaus with the epa and Emergency Response and i and my staff have that he perspective him to get a rule in place and protected and addressed risks we have identified. On december 19th, epa established the coal ash rule the first rule ever for safe disposal of coal combustion and landfills and impoundments. In 2008 the catastrophic failure of impoundment of the Tennessee Valley facility and epa Risk Assessment and 157 cases of mismanagement caused damage to the health and environment clearly demonstrate improper management of coal ash poses an unacceptable risk to human health and environment. We believe there are extensive studies on the environment and human health. It establishes technical requirements for landfills under subtitle d of the resource conservation and recovery act. In developing this we heard 150,000 comments, testimony from eight public hearings supplemented by three separate Public Comments on data the foundation of the rule. The rule is strong, effective approach across communities to help protect water land and air. The rule protects groundwater by protect k Groundwater Monitoring immediately cleaning up groundwater, closing impoundment impoundments contaminating groundwater and providing installation of liners and mine fills. It protects against catastrophic failures and extensive engineering testing and recommending closing for those that fail. And requiring an air control plan. Further, we provide states and communities the information they need to fully engage in the ruleser to. The rule requires utilities to post alls a spectator of the rule on a publicly verified website to be sure states have access to monitor the requirements of the rule. The rule has been designed to provide electric utilities generating coal ash with a practical approach, save coal oosh ash disposal and reasonable timelines for this to occur. We strongly recognize the role or state partners play in insuring compliance with environmental regulations. Epa is looking forward to working close ily with our partners in implementation an states can align their programs with the federal rule by utilizing the solid waste planning and management process and submit revisions limited to coal ash federal requirements for epa for approval. The Solid Waste Management plant can demonstrate how the rule incorporates criteria and utilizing state criteria and hi thoth cease where they want to be more stringent or otherwise working beyond the criteria. Epa will be working for a streamlined process for developing and improving Solid Waste Management plan. Of course, the rule does not prevent a state from adopts more stringent rules if it wants to. I suggest they take time and seek epas approval and conduct a necessary public process because the major elements of the rule is at least 18 months from today. Further, the rule promotes beneficial environmentally sound use of cool ash. It does not change the consumption or regulation of coal ash ben officially used. The rule distinguishes between use and disposal and to users of coal ash. We have separate ideology for coal ash users methodology and applied thatl . 0n methodology to demonstrate that we have confirmed its continued use. I will close by stating we believe this is a traus milestone to protect communities in which we work. And working with state partners and utilities on implementation. I look forward to your question. Thank you very much. Id hike to recognize myself for questions and we look forward to your good work and working with you. We see your partner behind you also working within the states. Under the final rule, no permits will be issued, isnt that correct. What we identified using the Planning Program is this states 10 bill permitting program and submit that for epa to be approved. They can but theres no requirement to. There is nob 1]z permitting process in the new rule. That is true. Once the Solid Waste Management plan is approved there will be a singular point of compliance. Utilities can then implement, through the state program and we have made clear in the preamble, that compliance will demonstrate compliance you understand why were asking that because the legislation we moved last cycle said federal standards im implementation where theres certainty and goes to mr. Mckinleys point. Isnt it true states are not required to adopt or implement the requirements . Clearly, they are not required but the states called on us to make this linement and why we established the Solid Waste Program and states can implement the requirements and seek epas approval from that and establish the alignment from our perspective. Neither epa nor the states can directly enforce the requirements in the final rule, isnt that correct . That is correct. We believe again using the state Solid Waste Management programs they can implement it once the state Solid Waste Management program is approved and independently states can implement requirements of the rule. Under your rule, the only enforcement mec. Ismfa under the recently reduced rule is citizen suits and litigation . We actually believe the Solid Waste Program when i proved will not result in excessive litigation. There will be litigation to enforce in those circumstances where states and others deem not to be in compliance. Youre more optimistic than i am, i guarantee that. Even if states adopt the rule utilities have to comply with the state requirement and the federal rule is that correct . The rule is directly applicable to utilities. Getting back to the solid waste plan, there is an opportunity states have sought to align and integrate the federal minimum requirements into their program and seek epa approval for that. You understand the line of questioning in its kind of vague. They can or they might, we kind of hope they do, there is an expectation they probably will. Theres not a lot of clarity. Then the other concern is if youre relying on citizen suits. Citizen suits will come right . No doubt that will come. If they are regionally directed you then have you could have a multiple standards throughout the country which arent the same, based upon the litigation and the rulings in these different courts. Isnt that a concern . Well, actually we dont anticipate that. The rule is pretty specific establishing minimum federal requirements for protection of groundwater preventing catastrophic failure for addressing dust. We dont think if you move forward implementing that and the states can implement that within the state program and epa approves the state Solid Waste Management plan we think there will be federal im sorry national consistency. You are more optimistic than i am. You mentioned the preamble. If a regulated facility complies with a state requirement more stringent and therefore not the same as the requirement in the final rule will the regulated entity also have to comply with the federal requirement . I just want to clarify. If a state adopts more stringent, adds to the federal requirement. Correct. Then gets an arule of from epa through a state Solid Waste Management plan the utilities would have to comply with stilly the state requirements and demonstrate compliance with federal requirements and additional requirements this state chooses to add. I think we will hear testimony in the next panel they dont believe thats true, there will be a twofold process, the federal government and the state epa and thats one of the concerns we have with the rule so good people can agree to disagree. I would like to recognize the Ranking Member of the subcommittee for five minutes. Thank you. Mr. Stanislaus good morning and thank you for joining us. It poses serious threats to our health and environment. That is why im pleased epa has finally set National Criteria for disposal of coal ash and states have requirements to follow. As i stated earlier, i would have preferred a stronger rule. Public health and virmtal alenvironmental advocates say they would have preferred a stronger rule. But the rule does have safeguards. I would like to go over important protections of the rule with you to ensure disposal sites are not located in dangerous areas, it puts in place five restrictions to see if im interpreting them correctly. Structures will not be allowed close to aquifers or wetlands seismic impact zones and unstable areas. Is that indeed correct . That is correct. They have to do analysis with respect to those location requirements and demonstrate whether they can safely operate and putting engineering measurements to any impacts. Proposals we have seen would have included five restrictions to permit a small aquifer buffer. I appreciate they include these requirements. Next to protect air quality, the new final rule would protect dust plans and covering or erecting wind barrier, is that correct . That is correct. Thank you. To protect groundwater contamination, at least one upgradeient well requirement and three down gradient wells. Is that correct . Yes. Why did the agency find it important to specify a minimum number of wells . This is standard protocol that we fully understand the potential impact to groundwater. Lastly i would like to turn to the Public Disclosure requirements to this rule. The rule establishes a maximum floorp for floor for what will have to be done and Public Information and document their compliance with a wide range of criteria with lorkz, design and Groundwater Monitoring. Is that correct . Thats correct. These disclosures will be essential in promoting transparency within the communities. Although a subtitle c rule might have offered more protection and enforcement and this will protect the human environment and goes beyond past bills. I want to thank the epa for finalizing this bill and seeking Public Comment in the course of developing this bill. Thank you. I yield back. A notification to my colleagues. The votes have been called. We have 10 minutes before a lot of us have to get there. We can get five minutes on each side and recess to have folks come back for this panel. The chair now rec nipsz mr. Harper for five minutes. Congratulations on your elevation. Thank you mr. Chairman. Mr. Stanislaus in light of the fact it is set at the mcl or background level of the cleanup, if a state chooses to utilize risk based cleanup coal based program under the established groundwater standard would the epa be able to include the plan as as stringent or less than the final rule. Let me break it down. Its a super fund cleanup. You begin with protecting groundwater in all cases. In selecting the cleanup remedy, you can look at the circumstance involved in the cleanup. In the same way we provide all the on the ground factors brought to were on these decisions. With respect to approval of a cleanup plan again, in the epas approval of Solid Waste Management plan the state can choose to enable the states approval of the cleanup plan. I think there is that ability for states to do that. Let me just ask this. If a state determines that if there is no human receptor for the groundwater and that a cleanup standard above the mcl or background is appropriate would that meet the minimum requirements of the rule . Let me get back to you on that. Okay. If ouellette us know. Sure. I yield back. The chair recognizes the Ranking Committee for five minutes. Thank you. No question aol ash poses risks if not disposed of properly. Many people have spent years on this issue and i commend the epa for finalizing this rule. Do you have the confidence this final rule is protective of the Public Health and environment and in your view are there gaps or protections under this rule that need to be fueled by legislation. I believe the rule is protective of anything identified. Any gaps to be fuld by legislation . We dont believe there are gaps. We believe all the risks and information we put in place all the rigorous standards will provide protection. What about beneficial reuse . Will this rule restrict beneficial use to stigmitize coal ash . We dont believe it is. It is not subject to the rule. I expect we will hear from the second panel that legislation is needed under subtitle in the future. What factors might lead epa to regulate coal ash under subtitle c . To be clear we proposed an approach under d and c. We made a decision under d. The c proposal is no longer on the table. Like any other rule in the future, it would go through the same ruler Public Notice and comment to avow your considerations. I have a stronger strong confidence between the strong National Criteria and Solid Waste Management Planning Program and epas approval of that, we believe moving forward we will have the protections necessary to protect the communities and working with the states in implementation. Its safe to say if coal ash does not become more toxic implementation of subtitle d was effective, epa d would have no reason to pursue a subtitle c rule. If it turns out ash does become more toxic and we find the states and utilities are not doing enough to protect human case, if that turned out to be the case would it be important for the epa to pursue subtitle c, in your opinion . We have reflected and evaluated data from all stakeholders. We believe we put in place a rigorous rule to offer protection to protection around the country. And weve been working with public stakeholders and utility to provide the protection. Beer were not looking at it further at this moment. Im saying, those who advocate you shouldnt be able to pursue subtitle c regulation or eliminate that option, if it turns out the ash is becomeing more problematic and the subtitle isnt tookdoing enough. Do you think its important to pursue subtitle c in every other eventuality. We will agrees it in the future. You dont want to comment on the possibility of pursuing sub subtitle c and whether its important . Not at the moment. Thank you. I yield back. The zwregentleman yields back his time. We will rey w now and come back immediately after the vote. There should be two votes and you have time to stretch and get a cup of coffee. Most of us will come back promptly after the second vote. This hearing is now recessed. As you heard this House Energy Subcommittee is taking a break to make votes in the u. S. House. When members return we will have live coverage on v span 3. Members are heading to the house for legislation to permanently prevent the use of federal funds for abortions. This first vote is a vote for establishing the rules of debating legislation and then we expect debate on the bills itself early this afternoon. You can see it live on cspan. The antiabortion measure coincides for the annual march and rally taking place in washington today. People travel all over the country at the National Mall and march to the supreme court. Today marks the 42nd anniversary of roe versus wade decision that legalized abortion in the u. S. We will have live coverage on the march and rally at 1 00 p. M. Eastern. The new senate has not seen much of minority leader harry reid this session. Hes been working at home recovering from injuries he received while exercising. This afternoon he will be there to talk about drrkemocratic priorities and gets under way at 12 30 p. M. Eastern. Again, were waiting for this hearing to continue on coal ash residue from coal fired power plants. Its expected to resume shortly. While we wait we will show you a part of democratss priority and how its communicated. Were here with a democrat from new york chair of the communications committee. Lets begin with the president s state of the Union Address middle class economics. How do you and other democrats plan to commute that message and try to push for it. Its vital. I may not be the smartest member of Congress Although if you listen to my colleagues the competition may not be that safe. The middle class is only as strong as it can be. We have had a message problem in the democrats. Going into this cycle in the midterm elections, the most frustrating element we look at polling and the vast majority of americans believe in middle class and policies but then believe republicans were better at leading the economy. Thats what you call a message problem and it has to be fixed. What went wrong that democrats were talking about in 2014 they are not going to be talking about now . How will it change leading up to the election in 2014, you had ebola isis syria, gaza, you had ukraine. It was very difficult to focus people on those domestic issues even though people felt those issues in their paychecks every single day. The week before an election day i couldnt buy my way on to a program like this unless i was willing to talk about sweeping of ebola in the country. That was one paradigm. Republicans are very good if not at policy but constructing message. They ladder up to two things were talking about. Big government and high taxes. Very often democrats ladder down to our 22 point plan on everything. We need to be as jim carvel said, keep it simple. He said in 1994, itkeep it simple. Its the paycheck. What will you do to keep it simple . What we have always done in middle class. Better paychecks better lifestyles. Most people know since theko recovery began the economy has grown 12 . Corporate profits have grown 42 , stock market grew 92 . The paycheck isnt holding on. Theyre looking at all these good news and looking at their paycheck, what about my good news. Bet r better infrastructure, people know when you invest in infrastructure broadband roads, bridge, youre creating jobs, in the long run reduce taxes and create jobs in the economy and expanding paychecks. We need to talk about that as well. Pat garafolo wrote this piece in the world news report. Democrats are seizing on an opportunity to be progressive at agcg moment its cheap and easy. Being out of power they wont have to pay the price in Campaign Dollars and blowback in which they could actually become law. When democrats controlled all of congress and the presidency its not like they made a move on paid sick leave or Financial Transactions tax or any of the other host of ideas that would have helped out the middle class. Remember, when the democrats controlled atit all the economy was in free fall because of eight years of bush policy. We would have loved to do these things and wanted to do these things. We were told at one point if we didnt pass t. A. R. P. , something the republicans wanted to pass or president bush there would be no economy in the next several days. We had to engage in rescue operations. We had to rescue this economy. People saw their 401 k s dissipate, their stock ss devalue and home values in free fall. What did president obama say in the state of the union. I didnt agree with everything he said in the state of the union. I do agree with this. We have come out of this crisis and built a foundation for economic stability and security and now we have to grow that foundation for the middle class. Where can the two sides agree to try to help the middle class . If you look at the state of the union i would have thought they crazy glued all the republican seats. Even when the president mentioned republican ideas they sat in their seats and wouldnt stand and applaud their ideas. In the past, there was agreement on things like infrastructure. We built this middle class by building things, that should be an area we can agree on. A middle class tax cut. Republicans are very good saying they never met a tax cut they didnt like. Why wouldnt they want a tax cut for middle class. Im hoping we will get those two things. Well come back. From lake station, indiana democratic caller. Caller thank you for taking my call. My call is on the previous conversation but for the guest. I dont understand or cognizant how the tax code works but it seems like a lot of this, the strirnging middle class is more pronounced when jobs and products started moving overseas. I understand that might be difficult to say, okay, were going to start doing it here again but maybe increasing the incentive as well as the penalty for companies who do it overseas, like a majority of workforce or products from overseas or outside the United States, penalties for those who hire illegal substantial ones, i dont know what they are now and financially increasing i guess cutting the taxes of a company who chooses to base theirv operations in the United States. Youre right. You should run for congress and thats what we tried to do. Republicans consistently voted against those proposals. This isnt hard common sense for the middle class. We have a tax code that stacks the deck against the middle class in order to stack the deck for the very wealthy connected and special interests. You want to ship a job oversea, you get a tax incentive to do that. No. Provide tax code and tax incentives to businesses that want to create jobs here and penalize businesses who want to ship jobs overseas. President obama talked about this you will see a lot on this issue, you have a tax code essentially built on shelters and loopholes. Some of these corporations pay more for accountants and other areas of the payroll to interpret the tax code to insure they pay no taxes. Why should we have a tax code that continues to squeeze middle class paychecks but give something called the trust Fund Loophole to the absolute wealthiest americans. Let lets shut down that trust Fund Loophole and use those savings to invest where its most necessary in the middle class. Do you agree with the president s statement to tax the gains on 501 k college plans. I am concerned about that. I dont necessarily agree with that. We will meet in the white house to see what kind alternatives that we will produce but there will be an alternative. That wont be put into a House Democrats budget. I cant imagine it would be. I spoke with Chris Van Hollen last night. And he and i both agreed along with several other democrats that that is is a new dispensable tool because he taxes on 529s is not the right way to go. Anthony in texas go ahead. My problem is this morning is about the proposal to pay for two years of college. I dont think its a good idea. I went to a school and you see very little of these schools. Its a technical school. They had curriculum to get into college and they also had skills that you could walk out the door and make good money. This was not restaurant wages. These are mechanics bricklayers, plumbers. Youve got a complete skill there at that school and i think that government would be better off instead of trying to create a situation like sending all these people to Community College, maybe everybody doesnt want to go. But we dont have skills in this country anymore. People are you know answering phones. They are working on computers. But real work you just dont see it anymore hardly and thats my comment. All right, anthony. Well have the congressman respond. It really is is personal. One of the reasons i strongly believe in middle class growth is because im a product of middle class. I grew up in long island, americas first suburb. My parents bought us a portable house thanks to the gi bill, a tool that the government used to expand the middle class. Things were okay until the 1970s until my dads paycheck was squeezed. My mom got a job as a typist in our den. So i would sit in the den to the click, click, cluck and clak of her typewriter then when i was in the ninth grade, my parents said, what college do you want to go to . Im smart enough and have the s. A. T. Scores, absolutely, but i cant afford it. So i went to Nassau Community college for two years. I wouldnt be here with you this morning if i wasnt in congress and i wouldnt be in Congress Without that Community College education. I saved up to go on College Loans and pay it back. I think what the president is saying Community College has always been one of those tools that strengthens the middle class. Its not for everybody. But we have a new economy. We have globalization new technologies. We need to realign our Community Colleges as the place you can go if youre in your 40s or 50s and that thing you were making in your career people arent buying it anymore. These need to be career re retraining centers and we need to make it affordable. The figure in the papers yesterday was that the College Proposal could l cost the treasury 6 billion in its first year. Can this country afford that is this. We have to really look at those numbers and im open to any proposal that realigns our Community Colleges to make them more assessable to people on their second or third career. They dont want to be unemployed. Enabling them to go to Community College is going to be off set by paying less in unemployment insurance, thats a good investment because its going to last them for year. Mark, independent caller. Go ahead. How you doing . Mr. Inhoffs work with mr. Shelton of hope do you think we ought to tell him about the earth summit in rio and c 40 cities of agenda in Sustainable Development and these other things thats progressively working with, is sierra cloubub and the videos on Sustainable Developments, c40 city project and all of us doing that before he decides anything on the climate . Mark, referring to the debate thats happening in the senate on the Keystone Pipeline bill. In front part of that was amendments on Climate Change. I think Climate Change, i believe in it. I dont know a representable scientist who does believe in it. Ill put the scientist up with politicians any day of the week. Now, Climate Change i think gives us an extraordinary opportunity to create new jobs in Clean Technologies and im concerned that were missing the boat. You think about it, what class in the 1950s and 60s, soefviets beat us to space. It was a space race and they want sputnik in october of 1957. The new sputnik is in fact Climate Change. Rising sea levels. When the military says if we dont do something about it, its going to affect our military capabilities. Weve got to focus on this. There is a new generation of jobs making alternative energy technologies. Engineering, assembleing. I think the federal government ought to be partnering with the private sector to create those jobs and make sure theyre sustainable over the longterm. Milton youre next for the congressman. Go ahead. Thank you. Congressman, i listeneded to what all of you democrats are saying about the minimum wage. You know, there are people out out here who live off of 3000 a year. Youre not talking about them. And if you keep on acting the way youre acting, youre going to lose the black vote. Talk about the low ones that are low and very low, you know, people. Thats how i feel. Im very passionate about this. You cant keep going on talking about the middle class. Blacks and people who are out there protesting to get a larger wage, theyre suffering out here. You guys got to take care of those individuals. Okay. Talking about low income americans. Youre right. Look, one of the strengths of the Clinton Administration was no matter where you were on the economic spectrum, from very poor to very rich in those eight years, everybody did better. You may not have done as good as you would want, but everybody was mobile. Under this economy that we have now, not just in the United States, but around the world, only a small segment of the population has done better and they have not only done better they have done extraordinarily well leaving everybody else behind. I believe the democrats have to talk to everybody on this spectrum. That has to be paycheck growth. Your paychecks and better jobs and affordable edgeucation. You put those three things together and there is nobody on the economic spectrum who doesnt understand the cn importance of those strategyies. Is is president obama and this administration partly to blame for this . Hes been in the drivers seat for six years. But had a group of people who kept grabbing the Steering Wheel from him and stepping on the brakes as often as they could stomping on the brakes and trying to steer further to the right. So its not easy to get to where you want when you have a bunch of people who want to ditch the car. I think we have to get beyond that now. Its a new day. We have a new congress and republican majority. We have a republican majority in the senate. This is a test, they told us they could govern and find areas of compromise were ready willing and able to engage them where we can. I dont think we should waste time on areas were never going to agree, but surely, we agree on tax cuts for the middle class. Lets cash those things. Trade. Trade is going to be a significant dewait. Im open. Ill listen to any arguments on both sides, but i said to the white house, speaking for myself now, im going to have to see in a trade move that were not just increasing gross domestic product, were increasing actual paychecks. Wall street journal this morning with a story, obama seeks to woo his own party. They deployed cabinet secretaries and set up a war room to promote fast tracked legislation on capitol hill. Portraying such a move as good for jobs and counter to chinas influence in the pacific. In the house nancy pelosi probably wont whip up her kau kesse against a fast track measure, though that will depend on details of legislation. I think thats right. Right now you have concept theory. Thats very interesting. Really entertaining. I want to know the bottom line on my constituents paycheck and if its going to continue to get squeezed the its going to be difficult, if not impossible, for me to support a trade deal. Looks like the unions are dwens this idea. Labor unions say the trade deals will cost u. S. High paying jobs. Thats a significant concern. So, we have to get beyond the, glad they set up a war room. As i said have you seen it . No, they can show me, but then theyd have to kill me. No, ive not seen it. Have you been asked, talked to from the administration . I have. And i expressed my view in good new york taste and they said, okay, thats fair enough, well come back to you. Chris in texas, a republican. Hi. Good morning. Morning. Just want eded to say that you know, the people have spoken and we now control the house for a reason. Because the policies that you guys have been putting forward are not working and the ones that you stalled in the senate, 300 something of you wont even read them. You just throw them in the trash can. Thats why were fixing to get a republican president as well. So that we can get our country back on line with the constitution, the bill of rights. That works. That always has. Those old guys that founded this country had it figured out. They knew how evil and g
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.