Senator chuck chuck ensley chairs this fivehour hearing. [indiscernible] [gavel pounding] [indiscernible] attorney general sessions, welcome. For all the people in the audience, we welcome you as well. I thank general sessions were being here that attorney general sessions were being here for the oversight hearing. His is an opportunity for congress to investigate and question the policies and actions of any executive branch. It is an opportunity for the executive branch to take responsibility for any of those policies and actions, and an opportunity for congress to defend its constitutional powers and check any abuses by an overreaching executive branch, and it has been that way for 230 years. Some have complained that we have not had an oversight hearing with this attorney general earlier. My reason for deferring was that the attorney general should have his team in place before appearing before us. Certainly, attorney general holder and attorney general lynch did have their respecti
[indiscernible] [indiscernible] [indiscernible] call to order. [indiscernible] attorney general sessions welcome and for all of the people in the audience we welcome you as well. I think dash and i think general sessions for being here for this oversight. Is just one of the critical functions of our branch its is an opportunity for congress to investigate and question the policieses and actions of any executive branch its an opportunity for the executive branch to take responsibility for any of the policies and actions. And check any abuses high and overreaching executive branch. Its been that way for 230 years. Some have complained we havent had oversight hearing with this attorney general. My reason for deferring was that the attorney general attorney general should have his team in place before appearing before us certainly attorney general holder did have the respective teams in place by the time they appeared here. The other side has been blocking executive nominations for the pas
Attorney general sessions, welcome. For all the people in the audience, we welcome you as well. I thank general sessions were being here that attorney general sessions were being here for the oversight hearing. His is an opportunity for congress to investigate and question the policies and actions of any executive branch. It is an opportunity for the executive branch to take responsibility for any of those policies and actions, and an opportunity for congress to defend its constitutional powers and check any abuses by an overreaching executive branch, and it has been that way for 230 years. Some have complained that we have not had an oversight hearing with this attorney general earlier. My reason for deferring was that the attorney general should have his team in place before appearing before us. Certainly, attorney general holder and attorney general lynch did have their respective teams well in place by the time they appeared here as you are now here. The other side has been blockin
Challenge. Next years farm bill deliberations, we have an opportunity to do more with out having to spend your money. Little over half of our food aid is provided through the farm bill in our food for Peace Program. The farm bill requires aid to be sourced almost entirely from u. S. Farmers. Half of which must be shipped on u. S. Flagged vessels according to the rules. These restrictions result in spending as little as 35 35 40 cents on the dollar on food. Let me say this one more time. Because of these ridiculous requirements, only 35 or 40 cents of each dollar is actually used to provide food to people who are starving. If we relax the preference to meet the needs overseas, the cost would drop dramatically. U. S. Farmers would still play a vital role in the program and we would free up over 300 million in taxes to be used to feed up to nine and half million more starving people each year. One of the major obstacles to modernizing food for peace are those who continue to support and p
Its merely an Administrative Task they lost track of. That doesnt sound like a very credible explanation either, does it . I fear theyre trying to come wake up some way to remand it and give an opening for the pto or give time for the government to renarrow the law and rejustify the results. That would be all i would have to say about the redskins case. It is literally impossible to distinguish from the tam case other than the quality of Workplace Environment and quality accommodation. Theres much to be encouraged about the tam case applying to things like redskins and campus speech and a good marker for hate speech. Just because youre offended doesnt mean you cant ban it. I worry about the hostile environment competing line of cases and where that would go. I guess ill stop there and let you guys have a chance for questions. Theres a lot more i can say about government speech but if anyone cares we will talk about it in the questions. Questions . Two questions although i dont want to