Changes the conversation because focusing on advancing women and, again, i want women in the top of every profession but when we think about it that way, we start counting. Because thats the way you measure how well women are doing, how many women are in fortune 500 and how many women are in Senior Management and how many women are computer scientists. All that have does focus pretty much on wealthy white women, by and large. It does not phofocus on the millions of the women at the bottom. One of the thing i realize, we have too few women at the top and too many women at the bottom and care or our lack of support for care plays a role at both ends. At the top end, if you take time out for care, your career goes off track. But for the millions of women at the bottom not supporting their care means if they take a day off they could lose a job, right . So focusing on care says we have to put in place the policies that rich women can buy their way out of often. We have to put in leave, paid family leave, paternity maternity and paternity leave and quality affordable child care. [ applause ] it, im sure, is not lost on the awed yents that we are two women up here having this conversation. And i want to close by another confession, i guess, which is when i was asked to do this interview, i leapt at it because i knew i would want to read your book and delighted to get the chance to talk to you. There was a tiny part of me that said i should give it to your man, about having men in the conversation. How many book interviews have you done that have been done with male journalists . Ive done a couple. Ive done a couple. Fareed zakaria. And im getting a lot of responses from men. Interesting. What are you hearing . Yesterday did i a radio show where a lot of men called in and talked about how theyre just as competent at home and they dont like the assumption that theyre not. I do think this conversation is ready to be broken open by men. And part of it is men are missing out. My husband wrote, why i put my wifes career first. He said it was hard on his career. It was better for his marriage. It was better for our sons. And it was better for him, that he has a relationship with them that his father never had with him. That he is grounded, the anchor of our family in a way women thats part of what we get out of being mothers and also being professionals. So why shouldnt men have the equal ability to really enjoy what fatherhood is about or to be with your own parents as they are toward the end of their lives. Its not a burden. When it works, its the greatest thing in the world. We just need to make it work for everybody. Its an empowering message, annemarie slaughter. Thank you so much. On our road to the white house coverage this evening, well take you to miami, florida, where republican president ial candidate donald trump will be addressing supporters. Well have that live on cspan 2 at 7 00 p. M. Eastern. Then on to council bluffs, iowa, where president ial hopeful senator ted cruz will be talking to voters at a town hall meeting live on cspan at 8 30 p. M. Eastern. And on saturday, well be in des moines, iowa, for the Jefferson Jackson dinner, where well hear from all four Democratic Candidates for president. You can tune in at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Cspan provides the best access for Hillary Clinton testifying before the House Select Committee on benghazi. There was no credible actionable threat known to our Intelligence Community against our compound. Our hearing coverage without commercials or commentary will air on cspan. Joining us on the line, though, is heidi przybyla, a reporter with usa today. Heidi, are you there . Yes, im here. Hi, heidi. Thanks so much for joining us. And can you after, what, ten hours actually 8 20 without breaks, can you tell whats did we learn today . Well, lets remember what the goals of this hearing were. They were two found. One, they were to uncover any new information related to the attacks in benghazi. And, two, the second goal was political. It was to let republicans prove this was not a political fishing expedition. On the first point, i think you heard the chairman say that he wasnt sure based on her testimony that they had learned anything new. That he would have to go back and review the transcripts from her previous testimony. What i can say is that there was a heavy focus during the hearing on a few things. One, that there were, by their accounts, hundreds of security requests that apparently never, quote, made it to her in box. There was a lot of focus on that. There was a lot of focus on the fact that she had a role in advocating to the president to intervene in the first place in libya. But really there were no obvious conclusions coming out of this and by the chairmans own words, you know, i think there was, as you heard from the callers, something in this on the political question for both sides. I think republicans who didnt like her and didnt support her in the first place and were suspicious about benghazi will walk away with it saying, you know, this is further proof that there was some kind of a coverup of something here. And on the democratic side i honestly think that in some ways this is going to be a boone to her just because if you look at the reaction out in the twitter sphere and just in general from democrats, the fact that, you know, this did go on so long, for ten hours, twice as long as the previous testimony, that she lost her voice by the end of it. And with so many questions that they felt had been asked and answered before, i think it may actually play to her political advantage. I did speak with the gop pollster who was also in the audience. And that was his assessment as well. Was that any of the fireworks and dynamics and drama that were coming off of the dias there would redound to her benefit just because the bar was so high for republicans coming into this, that there was no smoking gun coming out of this, no clear conclusion. Now, heidi, if you have to kind of choose maybe a high point for both the committee and for secretary clinton, is there one that stands out on sort of both sides of what we saw today . Well, i think on the gop side, representatives jordan, you know, did have some pretty pointed questions to her about the videos of the Embassy Attack and what exactly transpired in the immediate aftermath of the attacks and why there was this discrepancy between what really happened and what the administration was saying and what Hillary Clinton herself was saying in the media. He had some pretty pointed questioning. I think that was one of the high points for him. For her i think it was more her opportunity to share some of the personal stories behind her involvement in this. For example, you know, the details of what went on inside the embassy with the effort to try and resuscitate ambassador stevens and even, i think, by the republicans account, it was, quote, moving. I think that was the word of trey gowdy. I think from her perspective, just the ability her ability to put a more human face on the entire episode. Okay. So those are the high points. You know im coming back at you for the low points. Where do you think things really either fell apart for the committee or for hillary during this ten hours today . I think it actually started about three hours in when representative cummings went got very kind of loud and confrontational with representative gowdy, again, on the question of whether they were there for political reasons. And i know that going into this gowdy did not want thats exactly the kind of Major Television moment he did not want going into this. And he kept himself in check after the hearing but he did respond in kind. It got heated at that moment and i know that was exactly the kind of thing that he wanted to avoid. On substance i think one of the low points, again for republicans was much, much later after about nine hours of questioning when the substance clearly veered into things that were very off topic in terms of her use of private email server that was really unrelated to libya, that was just broadly questions about her use of her private email server which, again, that was something gowdy wanted to avoid. He said in preinterviews on National Television that he did not care about her emails that did not relate to libya. Sorry. Go ahead, heidi. Finish up. I have a hard time coming up with a real low point for clinton other than i think at one point she plugged her book which i would say wasnt necessarily the wisest move but, then again, seven, eight hours of questioning there. And just give us a quick sense since you were in the room and our cameras can only pick up so much. What did it feel like when you were in there and what was the mood . I know it was a long day. Clinton really kind of i was struck by the fact she looked so even keeled. When ron johnson was pointedly questioning her, she did respond and raised her voice in response and there was a lot that have going on aimed at her. In terms of the other atmospherics, people were showing they were tired. It was unusual she had a whole bench of democratic potential surrogates in the row behind her. Mostly Democratic House members who i talked to them and said, were you asked to come here . No we came here on our own. We were curious. Wed never seen anything like this before. I saw an interesting mix of people in the room such as tom davis, former republican who was there wearing his old congressional pin. I said why did you come here . He said its basically a spectacle. This is ive never seen anything like this. So i think there was a lot of interest from all quarters, you know, in the room represented there. To wrap up, whats next . What happens with the committee as far as you know . Gowdy will it continue to interview witnesses. You heard him at the end say that. This is not the end. That theyll continue to interview witnesses and i dont think were going to see any final conclusions out of this until well into the new year. My guess is republicans outside of congress and both in congress probably as well from a political perfespective will pit to focusing on other aspects of her service in the state department. I think well see both members on the committee and off continue to make the argument that this hearing raised questions that they dont have all the information. That will be what they say in the end we werent actually able to prove we got all of her emails and so well never know what we dont know. Clinton said i did not conduct most of my business at the state department over emails. The waters will continue to be muddied and both will have fodder to use, to appeal to their bases. Heidi przybyla, thanks so much for the insight and sharing what you heard and saw today. Thank you. One quick note about yets hearing, they will reair on cspan saturday and sunday beginning at noon each day. We are live at the rayburn building where the house subcommittee will be looking at whats being done to protect seniors against fraud talking to the Consumer Protection bureau and the federal trade commission as well as consumer groups. The committee wants to know what the different private sectors are doing to protect seniors. Should get under way shortly here live on cspan 3. The subcommittee on commerce manufacturing and trade will now come to order and the chair recognizes himself for five minutes for the purpose of an Opening Statement. This morning, first let me welcome our witnesses. This morning we will receive an update on the Consumer Protection efforts in place to address the fraud risk for americas seniors. As of july 2013 there are over 44 million americans who are older than 65, thats almost 14 of the population. The population 65 and older in the United States projects to outnumber people younger than 18 for the first time in 2033. A mere 18 years from now. The Median Income of these households is over 35,000 per year and 71 report having a computer in their home. The median network of seniors 65 and over is 25 times that of people under 35 years of age. The expanding population of Older Americans and their relative wealth compared to other great age groups increases the risk that someone will want to target them in scams. New technologies are everywhere. Each week a new smartphone or tablet is announced, new apps with new capabilities keep cropping up. Keeping up with new technology can be a challenge particularly for seniors that are less familiar with technology or are retired and are not exposed to new technology at the work place. The risk of fraud cannot be underestimated. In the november issue of Consumer Reports eight brave seniors came forward to tell their stories about being defrauded. In some cases out of thousands of dollars, sometimes just in a matter of hours. This is all before family or Law Enforcement could be notified or intervened. While fraud perpetrated by strangers against the elderly is not the only type of abuse against the elderly, it does represent 50 of the reported cases. That is why the hearing today is so important. Even where there is no silver bullet, it is critically important for the subcommittee to understand what government agencies, what the media, what universities, and what private groups are doing to protect from fraud and to help them recuperate losses if they are targeted. And we need to figure out how our enforcement agencies can devote more resources to the problem. There are few more important issues when it comes to fraud and consume earp protection. The chair now recognizes the subcommittee Ranking Member ms. Schakowsky. I appreciate the topic. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. I want to particularly thank a fellow chicagoan, robert harris, for being here. Mr. Harris is the cook county Public Guardian and hes leading the fight to protect the elderly against fraud and deception in my hometown. As a longtime consumer advocate and now the cochair of the Congressional Task force on seniors for the democratic caucus, im committed to ensuring that seniors benefit from strong Consumer Protections. More now than ever this subcommittee ought to be helping and we are beginning that process today to ensure that elderly americans are protected against fraudsters. Seniors represent the Fastest Growing segment of our population since 2000, the number of seniors has grown about 30 while the population overall just increased 10 . More than one in four seniors who lives alone has difficulty with activities of daily living or some Cognitive Impairment. According to the fbi seniors generally have higher net worth, a tendency to be trusting and are less likely to report fraud. All of this makes the elderly prime targets. We have seen an uptick in the number of products and services that are targeted toward the elderly including antiaging products, Health Related products, reverse mortgages. Im incredibly concerned about the risks posed by those products and services. Not necessarily that all of them are fraudulent but that we need to be careful. I want to know what trends our witnesses are seeing, hear their policy in public engagement, prescriptions for combatting fraud, and learn how we can help you in protecting the elderly. Id also like to say that if this congress is truly committed to routing out senior fraud, we should start by providing Adequate Funding to the cfpb, the i want to say it out. The Consumer FinancialProtection Bureau, the federal trade commission, and other agencies responsible for protecting seniors. Stopping fraud should not come at the cost of adequately overseeing Financial Services, industries, appropriately monitoring corporate Data Security and privacy policies. Yet, unfortunately, the republican budget would eliminate mandatory funding for the Consumer FinancialProtection Bureau and cut funding for the ftc more than 3 from the previous year. With those entities responsible for protecting more seniors from more threats each year, its hard to see how those proposals are anything but antisenior. I hope this hearing is the beginning of a collaborative process that will yield real benefits to Senior Citizens. Our senior population and their families deserve no less. Again, i thank the witnesses for appearing today. I thank the chairman for this hearing, and i look forward to gaining from your insights. Does the gentle lady yield back . And i yield back. The gentle lady yields back. The chair thanks the gentle lady. Are there other members on the republican side who seek time for an Opening Statement . We will temporarily conclude with members Opening Statements. There may be additional members on the other side that may yet arrive to the committee. We do know there is another subcommittee hearing going on this morning and people are toggling in between for the members who are here, the chair reminds members that pursuant to Committee Rules all members Opening Statements will be made part of the record. To be respective of everyones time it is quiet. The chair then is pleased to recognize the Ranking Member of the full committee, mr. Pallone. You shouldnt wait for me, mr. Chairman. So noted. It will never happen again. Seriously, you shouldnt. I want to thank you and the Ranking Member for holding todays hearing on ways to protect our seniors from fraud. As weve seen far too often each year, fraud affects consumers of all ages and the perpetrators of scams remain highly adept at avoiding the consequences of their criminal acts. Seniors, however, are a fastgrowing segment of our population