exploitation content, we have been building systems for a long time that use a.i. and we have thousands of people working on being able to identify this content and remove it. i think our systems are generally pretty effective of this -- -- >> my time is pretty short but would you say yes or no, then >> sorry can you repeat that? >> in the question, yes or no, then, in your responsibility >> congressman, i believe in a the responsibility -- >> let me move on. because i have got very short on time do you believe that facebook should be health accountable for any role in her death? yes or no? >> congressman, the responsibility that i think platforms should have is the build effective systems to moderate this content. >> i am going to have to take that to not responding to the question unfortunately, stories like amanda todd's are becoming more common we often talk about how your platforms can be used for good

or evil, the evil seems to persevere. mr. zuckerberg, you -- change to section 230 to ensure that tech companies are held accountable for certain actions that happen on their platforms such as child exploitation what specific changes do you support in sex 230 >> thanks, congressman i would support two specific changes, especially for large platforms. although, i want to call out that i think for smaller platforms, i think we need to be careful about any changes that we make that remove their immunity because that could hurt competition. let me just call on these for larger platforms i think first, platforms should have to issue transparency reports that state the prevalence of content across all different categories of harmful content, child expolitication, terrorism, insidement of

violence, improper intellectual property violence, whatever the harms are. >> where would those transparency reports be reported to how often you should they go out? >> congressman, as a model, facebook has been doing something to this effect for every quarter, where we report on the prevalence of each category of harmful content and how effective our systems are in identifying that content and removing it in advance i think the company should be held accountable for having effective systems to do that broadly. the second change that i would propose is creating accountability for the large platforms to have effective systems in place to moderate and remove clearly illegal content so things like sex trafficking or child exploitation, or terrorist content. and i think it would be reasonable to season immunity for the larger platforms on having a generally effective

system in place to moderate clearly illegal types of content. >> let me interrupt really quickly. i am running really short on time i know in your testimony you are talking about that -- you say the platforms should not be held liable if a particular piece of content evades its detection again, that's one of the areas -- when you are talking about the transparency and also the accountability i would like to follow up on. let me -- i have to go on real quick. mr. pichai, yes or no, do you agree with mr. zuckerberg's changes to section 230 >> there are definitely good proposals around transparency and accountability which i have seen in various legislative proposals as well which i think are important principles and we would certainly welcome legislative approaches in that area. >> mr. dorsey, do you agree with mr. zuckerberg

yes or no, on the changes on 230? >> i think it is going to be very hard to determine what's a large platform and small platform and it may incentivize the wrong things. >> gentleman's time is expired. >> my time is expired, i yield back. >> chair recognizes chair krakowski for five minutes >> mr. zuckerberg, immediately after the capital insurgency, sheryl sandberg did an interview in which she insist has the siege was largely planned on smaller platforms, but court filings actually show something quite the opposite, that the proud boys and oath keepers used facebook to coordinate in real time during the -- during the siege. and so my question for you is,

will you admit today that facebook groups in particular played a role in the -- in fomenting the extremism that we saw and that led to the capitol siege? >> congresswoman, thanks for the question on this in the comment that sheryl sandberg made what i believe we were trying to say was -- and what i stand behind is what is what was widely reported at the time after january th? i'm sorry to interrupt as many of my colleagues have had to do. because we only have five minutes. but would you say and would you admit that facebook played a role >> congresswoman, i think, certainly, there was content on our services and -- and from that

perspective, i think that there is further work that we need to do to make our services and moderation more effective. >> i hear that i hear that. okay i am going the ask mr. pichai a question many companies have used section 230 as a shield to escape consumer protection morals and i have a bill that would actually not protect companies that do that and so, mr. pichai, would you agree that that would be a proper use, to not allow liability protection for those who violate consumer protection laws >> congresswoman, consumer protection laws are very important in many areas, we comply with compa, and hippa i think the right approach is to have legislation in applicable

areas and have us -- >> i am going to have to interrupt again. is that a yes? is that if a law has been broken, the consumer protection law, that it would not -- there would not be light protection under section 230 for you? >> we rely on the liability protections to actually take strong action in particularly new types of content, when the -- shooting happens, within a few minutes our teams have to make decision about the content to take down that certainly is what we rely on i agree that we should have strong consumer protection laws and be subject to it and have the agencies like the ftc have oversight over those laws and how we enforce them. >> thank you

let me ask a a real yes or no question do you think when you take money for advertise its that promote disintegration, that you are exempt from liability? yes or no? >> section 230 -- >> mr. zuckerberg? yes or no? >> congresswoman, i don't know the legal answer to that but we don't allow misinformation in our ad any add that has been fact checked as false, we don't allow to run as an ad. >> okay. mr. dorsey >> again, i also would need to review the legal precedent for it, but we would -- we would not allow that. >> okay. and mr. pichai >> we are subject to ftc's deceptive add practice, there are statutes which we are subject to and we removed more than 3 million bad ads last year alone. >> let me ask you one more question do you think that section 230

should be expanded to trade agreements that are being made, as happened in the u.s. trade agreement with mexico and canada yes or no? mr. zuckerberg >> congresswoman, my primary goal would be to help update section 230 to reflect the -- the kind of modern reality, what we have learned to every 25 years that said, i do still think that section 230 plays a foundational role in the development of the international. and companies getting built. i do think that we should support it. >> we are talking here about trade agreements mr. pichai >> congresswoman, i think there is value in it but if there are evolution of section 230, that should apply, so in a flexible way being able to do that would be good, i think. >> mr. dorsey? >> i don't fully understand the ramifications of what you are

suggesting so i would have to review that. >> to have a liable shield that would be international and ratified in trade agreements i think it is a bad idea. >> the gentle lady's time has expired. >> thank you i yield back. >> the chair recognizes mr. bill aracas subcommittee, ranking member of the subcommittee on consumer production and commerce for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. i appreciate it. doctor -- mr. dorsey, you have heard briefly about what i am hearing from again in my district -- my opening remarks you have heard them. the other key part with these stories that we are hearing when we conduct these survey is how we empower law enforcement in a hearing last year, we received testimony that since 2016, twitter has intentionally curtailed sharing thread data with law enforcement fusion

centers. here's the question. you are well aware that on twitter and pair scope that traffic has increased from bad actors seeking to groom children for molestation, lure females into sex trafficking, sell illegal drugs, insight violence, and even threaten to murder police officers. are you willing to reinstate this cooperation, retain evidence, and provide law enforcement the tools to protect our most vulnerable? yes or no? >> first, child sexual exploitation has no place on our platform and i don't believe that's true. we work with local law enforcement regularly. >> so you are saying that this is not true, what i am telling you? are you willing to reinstate -- reinstate -- in other words, it's not going on now, reinstate this cooperation with law enforcement to retain evidence

and provide law enforcement the tools to protect our most vulnerable >> we would love to work with you in more detail on what you are saying but we work with law enforcement regularly. we have a strong partnership >> so you are saying that this is not true, what i am telling you? >> i don't believe so, but i would love to understand the specifics. >> will you commit to doing what i am telling you you are not doing in the future and work with me on this? >> we will commit to continue doing what we are doing. >> and what is that? you are saying that -- >> working with local law enforcement. >> okay. let me go on to the next question but i am going to follow up with this, to make sure you are doing this i mean, our children's lives are in jeopardy here mr. zuckerberg, we have heard you acknowledge mistakes about your products before there are now media reports of an instagram for under 13 being

launched my goodness. between this and youtube kids, you and mr. pichai have obviously identified a business case for targeting this age bracket with content and i find that very concerning. targeting this particular age bracket, 13 and under. given these free services, how exactly whether you be making money? or are you trying to monetize our children, too, and get them addicted early and will you be allowing your own children to use this site with the default settings? we are talking about the -- again, the site that apparently is being launched for children under -- 13 and under -- or under 13, actually can you please answer that question for me? >> congressman, we are early in thinking through how this service would work

there is clearly a large number of people under the age of 13 who would want to use a service like instagram we currently don't allow them to do >> what would be beneficial the our children to launch this kind of service >> well, congressman, i think helping people stay connected with friends and learn about different content on line is broadly positive there are clearly issues that need to be thought through and worked out, including how parents can control the experience of kids, especially kids under the age of 13 and we haven't worked through all of that yet. so we haven't formally announced the plans. but i think that something like this could be fight helpful for a lot of people. >> excuse me okay i will reclaim my time mr. pichai, your company has had failures rating content for kids what advice would you offer your

colleague? >> we have invested a lot in a one of a kind product, youtube kids the content is -- we work with trusted content partners think sesame street as an example of the type of channel you would find there science videos, and cartoons, and we take great effort to make sure -- >> i reclaim my time i have one last question for mr. zuckerberg do you have concerns with what has appeared on your platform posted by youtube? you know, with regard to your children, but in general, do you have concerns? yes or no. >> congressman, are you asking me about youtube >> yes, i'm asking you about youtube. >> congressman, i use youtube to watch educational videos with my children, and -- >> is that a yes. >> yeah. >> do you have concerns personally for your children and

your family personally do you have concerns. >> congressman, my children are 5 and 3iers o-- 5 and 3 years old. when they are watching youtube i am supervising them. in that context no, i haven't had concerns but i think it is important for anyone building a service for kid the use by themselves that there are appropriate parental controls. >> the gentleman's time expired. >> let me ask the members to stick to our five-minute rule so we can get out of here before midnight the chair will now recognize mr. fallone. >> after listening to the testimony, you definitely give the impression that you don't

think you are actively promoting this extremism i disagree with that you are not passers by or bystanders you are not religious organizations trying to do a good job for humanity. the point we are trying to make today, at least i am, is that when you spread this misinformation, extremism, actively promote and it amplify it you do it because you make more money i kind of deny the basic premise of what you said let me get to the questions. let me ask mr. zuckerberg zuckerberg, according to a may 2020 "wall street journal" report a facebook researcher concluded that facebook's own recommendation tools were tied to a significant rise in membership in extremist facebook groups in germany. i wrote to you last month requesting this research and related documents. i trust you will fully cooperate with the committee's inquiry and provide all the requested documents and information. question, please, yes or no, were you aware this research showing that 64% of the members

in the exextremist facebook groups joined because of facebook's recommendation tools, joined these extremist groups in germany? were you aware of that yes or no? >> congressman, this is something we study -- >> i am asking were you aware of it it is a simple question, were you aware of it that is all i am asking >> at what time. after we studied that. >> i just asked if you were aware of it, mr. zuckerberg. yes or not if not, i assume the answer is yes. >> i have seen the study it was about content leading up to the german election >> let me ask you a question custom relates to that you said yes the troubling research i mentioned demonstrates that facebook was not simply allowing this information and extremism to spread, it actively amplified and it spread it this is my point in other words, facebook didn't stop recommending political

groups to the united states until after the january 6th insurrection, years after it was made aware of this research. it compels us to reevaluate platform's liabilities back to that "wall street journal" article, facebook's chief product officer, chris cox, championed an internal effort to address division on facebook and proposed a plan that would have reduced the spread of content by hyper active users on the far left and far right. the article alleges mr. zuckerberg that you personally reviewed this proposal and approved it but only after its effectiveness was decreased to 80%. is that true yes or no? please. >> congressman, we have made a lot of measures to fight this content, including -- >> did you approve it after its effectiveness was decreased to 80%? yes or no? >> congressman i can't speak to that specific camp we have put in place a lot of different measures in thing a grated i think they are effective, including -- >> did you review the proposal

and approve it >> congressman, we do a lot of work in this area. i review a lot of proposals and we have move forward on a lot of steps. >> it is not a difficult question i am asking if you real estate viewed this internal proposal and you approved it. and you won't even answer that it is so easy to answer that question it is very specific. you won't answer, right? yes or no? >> that's not what i said. i said i did review that in addition to many other proposals that we have taken action on, including shutting off recommendations for civic and political groups. >> did you approve with it the 80% decrease in effectiveness? >> congressman, i don't remember that specifically. but we have taken a number of different steps on this. >> let me address mr. pichai according to the "new york times," youtube's recommendation algorithm is responsible for more than 70% of the time users spend on youtube a former design officer said if

i am on youtube and i want you to the watch more i am going to always steer you toward crazy time is it designed to encourage users to stay on the site? yes or not >> content responsibility is our number one goal. that trumps everything >> i am only asking very simple whether youtube's recommendation algorithm is designed to get users to stay on the side? >> it is not yesser no. >> the answer is yes the bottom line is simply put your company's bottom line compel you to amplify extremist content and users. it has real world consequentials that's why congress has to act because you are not bystanders you are encouraging this stuff thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the chair now recognizes ms. rogers, the full committee ranking member, for five

minutes. >> we have tragically lost a number of young people to suicide in my community n. a three-year period from 2013 to 2016, the suicide more than doubled in spokane county. in the last six months, one high school lost three teens. right now, suicide is the second leading cause of death in the entire state of washington for teens 15 to 19 years old as i mentioned, it has led to many painful conversations, trying to find some healing for broken families and communities. and together, we have been asking, what's left our kids with a deep sense of brokenness? why do children, including kids we have lost in middle school, feel so empty at such a young, vulnerable age some studies are confirming what parents in my community already know too much time on screens and social media is leading to loneliness and despair it seems to be an accepted truth in the tech industry

because what we are hearing today, making money is more important. bill gates put a cap on screen time for his daughter. steve jobs once said in a quote, we limit how much technology our kids use at home mr. zuckerberg, you have also said that your kids -- or you don't want your kids sitting in front of screens passively consuming content. so mr. zuckerberg, yes or no, do you agree, too much time in front of screens, passively consuming could be tent is harmful to children's mental health >> congresswoman, the research that i have seen on this suggests that if people are using computers and social apps. >> could you just answer yes or no i'm sorry. could you use yes or no. >> i don't think that the research is conclusive on that but i can summarize what i have learned if that's helpful? >> i will follow up at a later

time because i -- i do know that facebook has acknowledged that passive consumption on your platform is leading to people feeling worse. and you said that going from video to video is not positive yet facebook is designed to keep people scrolling instagram is designed to get users to go from video to video. so i would like to ask you if you have said earlier that you don't want kids sitting in front of the screens passively consuming content and your products are designed to increase screen time, do you currently have any limitations on your own kids' use of our products or how do you think that will change as they get older >> sure. congresswoman, my daughters are 5 and 3 and they cone use our roukts -- that's not exactly true my eldest daughter max i let her use messenger kids styles to

message her cousins. what we have seen is using social apps to connect the other people can have positive mental health and well-being benefits, helping people feel more connected and less lonely. passively consuming content doesn't necessarily have those positive benefits for well-being it is a common miss conaccepting that our teams or goals are have goals to increase the amount of time that people send. >> thank you mr. zuckerberg, i do have a couple more questions. do you agree that our business model and the design of your products is to get as many people on the platform as possible and to keep them there for as long as possible? if you could answer yes or no, that would be great? >> congresswoman, from a mission perspective, we want to serve everyone but our goal is not -- we don't -- i don't give our news feed team, our instagram team goals around increasing the

amount of time people spend. i believe if we build a useful product which -- okay thank you. we all have limited time i think the business model suggests that it is true it was mentioned earlier that you are studying extremism i would like to ask yes or no with all of you beginning with mr. zuckerberg as facebook conducted any internal research on the effects your products are having on the mental health children >> congresswoman, we are -- >> would you say yes or no >> i believe the answer is yes. >> mr. dorsey, has twitter >> i don't believe so, but we will follow up with you. >> okay. mr. pichai, has google conducted any research on the effect your products are having on the mental health of children? >> we concert widely with expert third parties on this area, including sam as a and other mental health organizations and spend a lot of time and effort

in this area. >> i would like to see that. i had sounds like you have studied extremism, let's get focused on our children. >> gentle lady's time is expired. the chair now recognizes mr. rush for five minutes. you need to unmute there you go nope, you are still muted. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman we all agree that social media sites fomenting -- by stoking racial division or exacerbating racial injustices -- >> we have been watching the ceos of alphabet, facebook, and twitter testifying in front of lawmakers of the house energy and commerce committee we are going the leave that and take you now to the president's first presidential news conference

let's listen in. >> on december 8th, i indicated that i hoped to get 100 million shots in people's arms in my first 100 days we met that goal last week, by day 58 42 days ahead of schedule. now today i am setting a second goal and that is, we will, by my 100th day in office, have administered 200 million shots in people's arms that's right 200 million shots in 100 days. i know it's ambitious. twice our original goal. but no other country in the world has even come close. not even close to what we are doing. i believe we can do it today, we made a historic investment in reaching the hardest hit and the most vulnerable communities, the highest risk communities as a sequence of the virus by investing an additional $10 billion in being able to reach

them i also set a goal before i took office of getting a majority of schools in k-8 fully open in the first 100 days now, thanks to the enormous amount of work done by our administration, educators, parents, local, state education officials and leaders, recent department of education survey shows that nearly half the k-8 schools are open now full time five days a week for in-person learning not yet a majority but we are really close. and i believe in the 35 days left to go, we will meet that goal as well as of yesterday, more than 100 million payments of $1,400 have gone into people's bank accounts that's real money in people's pockets, bringing relief instantly, almost. and millions more will be

getting their money very soon. one final note since we passed the american rescue plan we are starting to see new signs of hope in our economy. since it was passed, a majority -- a majority of economic forecasters have significantly increased their projections on the economic growth that's going to take place this year. they are now projecting it will exceed 6%. 6% growth in gdp just this morning, we learned that the number of people filing for weekly unemployment insurance fell by nearly 100,000 persons. that's the first time in a year the number has fallen below the prepandemic high so there are still too many americans out of work, too many families hurting, and they still

have a lot of work to do but i can say to you, the american people, help is here. and hope is on the way now, i will be happy to take your questions zeke, "associated press. >> thank you, president. you mentioned your progress on covid-19 i would like to ask you about some of the other issues facing your presidency. one of the defining challenges you face in coming months is how to deliver on your promise to americans on issues like immigration reform, gun control, voting rights, climate change. all of those right now are facing stiff united opposition from republicans on capitol hill how how far are you willing to go to achieve the promises that you made to the american people? >> look, when i took office, i

decided that it was a fairly basic, simple proposition. and that is, i got elected to solve problems and the most urgent problem facing the american people i stated from the outset was covid-19 and the economic dislocation for millions and millions of americans. so that's why i put all my focus in the beginning -- there were a lot of problems, put all my focus on dealing with those particular problems. and the other problems we are talking about, from immigration, to guns, and the other things you mentioned are long-term problems they have been around a long time and what we are going to be able to do, god willing, is now begin one at a time to focus on those as well. and whether it is immigration or guns or a number of other problems that face the country but the fundamental problem is getting people some peace of

mind so they can go to bed at night and not stare at the ceiling wondering whether they lost their health insurance, whether they are going to lose a family member, whether they are going to be in a position where they are not going to be -- they are going to lose their home because they can't pay their mortgage or millions of people are going to get thrown out of their homes because of their inability to pay their rent. so we are going to move on these one at a time, try to do as many simultaneously as we can but that's the reason why i focused as i have. and here's the deal. i think my republican colleagues are going to have to determine whether or not we want to work together or decide that the way in which they want to proceed is to just decide -- divide the country, continue the politics

of division. i am not going to do that. i am just going to move forward take these thing as they come. >> to follow up, can your presidency be a success if you can't make progress on climate change, immigration reform, gun control, voting rights >> i olympian on making progress on all of them but that's going to be for the american people to decide. i think -- i doubt -- maybe you did. maybe others did i thought many of you thought there was no possibility of my getting the plan i got passed passed without any republican votes. pretty big deal. got passed growing economy. people's lives are changing. so let's see what happens. all i know, i have been hired to solve problems to solve problems, not create division okay how about yamish >> thanks so much, mr.

president. you have said over and over again that immigrants shouldn't come to this country right now this isn't the time to come. that message is not being received instead the perception of you that got you elected as a moral decent man is the reason why immigrants are coming to this country, entrusting you with unaccompanied minors how do you resolve that tension and how do you choose which families can stay, which can go given the fact that with title 42 there are some staying, and given the time line we won't be seeing overcrowded facilities run by cbp when it comes to unaccompanied matters. >> i guess i should be flattered that i am a decent man, that's why they are coming, biden is a good guy truth of the matter is, nothing has changed. as many people came -- 28% increase in children at the border in my administration. 31% in the last year -- in 2019,

before the pandemic in the trump administration it happens every single solitary year there is a significant increase in the number of people coming to the border in the winter months of january, february, march. it happens every year. in addition to that, there is a -- and nobody -- and by the way, does anybody suggest that there was a 31% increase under trump? because he was a nice guy? and he was doing good things at the border that's not the reason they are coming the reason they are coming is, that it is the time they can travel with the least likelihood of dying on the way because of the heat in the desert number one number two, they are coming because of the circumstances in country, in country. the way to deal with this problem -- i started to deal with it back when i was a united states senator -- i mean, vice

president, putting together a bipartisan plan of over $700 million to do the root causes of why people are leaving what did trump do? he eliminated that funding he didn't use it he didn't do it. in addition to that, what he did, he dismantled all the elements that exist to deal with what had been a problem and has been continuing to be a problem for a long time. he, in fact, shut down the number of beds available he did not fund hhs to get people -- to get the children out of those border patrol facilities, where they should not be they are not supposed to be more than a few days arc little while. but he dismantled all of that. so what we are doing now is attempting to rebuild -- rebuild a system that can accommodate what is happening today. i would like to think it is because i am a nice guy.

but it is not. it's because of what has happened every year. one more thing on this if you look at the number of people coming. the vast majority, the overwhelming majority of people coming to the border and crossing are being sent back are being sent back. thousands. tens of thousands of people who are over 18 years of age and single people, one at a time coming, have been sent back, sent home. we are sending back the vast majority of the families that are coming we are trying to work out now with mexico their willingness to take more of those families back but that's what's happening. they are not getting a across the border and those that are coming across the border who are unaccompanied children, we are moving rapidly to put in place what was dismantled, as i said. for example, of all the children who are coming acrossthe borde

over 70% are 16 or 17iers old. we are not talking about people ripping babies from mother's arms or approximate-year-olds standing at the border less than 1.5% fall in the category of the very young what we are doing is we are providing for the space, again, to be able to get these kids out of the border patrol facilities which no child -- no one should be in any longer than 72 hours and today i went to -- for example, i used all the resources available to me, went to the defense department, and the secretary of defense has just made available fort bliss 5,000 beds immediately available. 5,000 beds on the texas border so we are building back up the capacity that should have been maintained and built upon that trump dismantled it's going to take time. and the other thing we are doing, i might add -- am i

giving you too long an answer, because if you don't want the details -- >> [ inaudible question ]. >> i don't know how much detail you want about immigration grags. maybe i will stop there. >> my follow-up question is, one, if you could talk about which families, why they are being -- the families that are being allowed to stay, why they are being allowed to stay. in addition to that, when it comes to the filibuster, immigration is a big issue of course related to the filibuster but there is also republicans who are passing bill after bill trying to restrict voting rights chuck schumer is calling it an existential threat to democracy. why not enact the filibuster which gets around voting rights, immigration, jim clyburn, who know very well has backed the idea of a filibuster rule when it comes to civil rights and voting rights. >> well, look. i am going to deal with all of these problems

the question is, the priorities as they come and land on my plate. let's go to the first question you asked, the first of the second questions that you asked. that is, what about dealing with families why are some not going back? because mexico is refusing to take them back they are saying they won't take them back, not all of them, we are in negotiations with the president of mexico. i think we are going the see that change. they should all be going back. all be going back. the only people we are not going to let sitting there on the other side of the rio grandee by themselves with no help are children and what we are doing there -- it is an important point to understand -- i know you understand it. i don't mean to say it that way. the important point focus on, the vast majority of people under the age of 18 coming to the united states come with a telephone number on a wrist band or come with a telephone number in their pocket in the made to

a mother, a father, a close relative, a grand mom or gran pop. what was happening before is it's taking literally weeks and weeks and maybe even months before anyone would pick up the phone and call the see if there really was someone there well, we have set up a system now where within 24 hours there is a phone call made as that child crosses the border and then a verification system being put in place as of today to determine quickly whether or not that is a trafficker being called or that is actually a mom, a dad, and/or a close relative they are establishing that right off the bat. if it is mom or dad, dad says, to take the extreme case, i have got a birth certificate, then guess what we are getting that kid directly to that parent immediately so that's going the reduce, significantly -- there is two ways to reduce child populations

in circumstances that are not acceptable, like being held at a border patrol station. one is to get them to the place where they have a relative and set a date as to when a hearing can be held. the second way to do it is, put them in a health and human services facility that we are occupying now, both licensed beds around the country that exist, as well as, for example, federal resources like fort bliss to get them safely in a place where they can be taken care of while their fate is determined >> filibuster. >> with regard to the filibuster, i believe we should go back to a position in the filibuster that existed just when i came to the united states senate 120 years ago and that is that it used to be required for the filibuster -- and i had a card on this

i was going to give you the statistics but you probably know that that it -- it used to be that -- from between 1917 and 1971, the phil buster existed. there were a total of 58 motions to break a filibuster that whole time last year alone, there were five times that many. so it's being abused in a gigantic way and, for example, it used to be you had to stand there and talk and talk and talk and talk until you collapsed. and guess what people got tired of talking and tired of collapsing. filibusters broke down and we were able break the filibuster, get a quorum and vote. so i strongly support moving in that direction in addition to having an open mind about dealing with certain thing that are just elemental to the functioning of our democracy, like the right to vote like the basic right to vote

we have amended the filibuster in the past. but here's the deal. as you observed, i'm a fairly practical guy. i want to get things done. i want to get them done consistent with what we promised the american people. in order to do that, in a 50/50 senate, we have got to get to the place where i get 50 votes so that the vice president of the made to can break the tie, or i get 51 votes without her. so i am going the say something outrageous i have never been particularly poor at calculating how to get things done in the united states senate so the best way to get something done, if you -- if you hold it near and dear to you that you would like to be able to -- anyway we are going to get a lot done if we have to, if there is complete lockdown and chaos as a

consequence of the filibuster, then we will have fog beyond what i am talking about. okay hang on. sorry. oh, sang mae miss kim >> thank you, mr. president. to follow up on the filibuster, do you believe it should take 60 votes to end a filibuster on legislation, or 51 >> if we could end it with 51, we would have no problem you are going to have to -- the existing rule -- it is going to be hard to get a parliamentary ruling that allows 50 votes to end the filibuster, the existence of a filibuster. but -- it is not my expertise on what the parliamentary rules on how to get there are, but our

preoccupation with the filibuster is totally legitimate in the meantime we have got a lot to do while we talk about what to do about the filibuster. let me get here. to he can. cecilia vega >> i would like to circle back to immigration, please you just listed the reasons that people are coming, talking about in country problems, saying it happens every year you blamed the last administration -- sir, i just got back last night from a reporting trip to the border where i met a 9-year-old who walked here from honduras by himself along with another little boy. >> astounding. >> he had a phone number on him and we were able to call his family his mother says she sent her son to this country because she believes that you are not deporting unaccompanied minors like her son that's why she sent him alone, from honduras. sir, you blamed the last administration

but is your messaging in saying that these children are and will be allowed to stay in this country and work their way through this process encouraging families like joseph's to come >> well, look, the idea in a i am -- >> well, look, the idea that i am going to say, which i would never do, if an unaccompanied child ends up at the border we are going to let him starve to death on other side -- no previous administration did that either except trump i am not going to do it. i am not going to do it. that's why i asked the vice president of the united states yesterday to be the lead person on dealing with focusing on the fundamental reasons why people leave honduras, guatemala, el salvador in the first place. it's because of earthquakes, floods it's because of lack of food it's because of gang violence.

it is because of a whole range of things that when i was vice president i had the same deal obligation to deal with unaccompanied children i was able to get it slowed up significantly by working with the heads of state of those communities to do things like in one of the major cities the reason people were leaving is they can't you walk object the street because the kids were getting beat up or shot or gang violence what i was able to do was not give hundred to the head of state because so many are corrupt. i was able to say, okay, you need lighting in the street to change things? i will put the lighting in we got a contractor. we got the type of lighting. we paid the contractor didn't go to their government. violent crime significantly decreased in that country. fewer people sought to leave two hurricanes hit we went down and helped in a certain way so people wouldn't

want to leave in the first place because they didn't have housing or water or sustenance we are going to do a lot in our administration we are going to be spending that.00 plus million a year to change the lives and circumstances of why people leave in the first place kitche have a great idea. i'm going to make sure my son is taken care of is put -- who old was he or she? >> he's 9. i met a 10-year-old. >> a 9-year-old, i'll send him on a 1,000-mile journey up to the quite because i know joe biden's a nice guy and he'll take care of him what a desperate act to have to take circumstances must be horrible so we can do something about that that's what the vice president's going to be doing, what i did when president obama asked me to come and deal.

i was in turkey at the time. he said he got to take care of this so we put together a plan and it had an impact. so the question here is whether -- how we go ahead and do this. what we do there's no easy answer >> quick follow if i may do you want to see these unaccompanied minors staying in this country or be deported eventually >> the judgment has to be made whether or not -- in this young man's case he has a mom at home. there's a reason he would be flown back to his mom. >> final follow, sir you mentioned circumstances that must be horrific the customs and border protection facility is at 1,556% capacity right now with mostly unaccompanied minors, kids sleeping on floors, packed into

the pods i have spoken to lawyers who say that some of the kids have not seen the sun in days what is your reaction to the images from that particular facility is what's happening inside acceptable to you? when is this going to be fixed is. >> that's a serious question, right? is it acceptable to me come on. we'll move 1,000 of those kids out quickly. that's why i got ft. bliss opened up, working from the moment this started to happen to try to find additional access for children to be able to safely, not just children, but parti particularly children, to be safely housed while we follow through on the rest of what is happening. that is totally unacceptable ken? >> thank you, mr. president. i wanted to ask you about afghanistan.

you face a may 1st deadline for the withdrawal of u.s. troops from that country. as a candidate in foreign affairs you wrote that it is past time to end these forever wars can you commit to the american people that by may 2 the u.s. will no longer have forces in afghanistan? >> the answer is that it's going to be hard to meet the may 1 deadline just in terms of tactical reasons, hard to get those troops out so what we have been doing, what i have been doing and what secretary blinken has been doing has been woe have been meeting with our allies, those other nations with allies with troops in afghanistan, as well, and if we leave we are going do do so in a safe and orderly way. we're in consultation i said with the allies and partners

how to proceed and secretary blinken is meeting in brussels this week with ato allies, particularly those with forces there and general austin just met and i'm waiting for the briefing on that, the leader quote in afghanistan and kabul and there's a u.n.-led process that's beginning shortly on how to mechanically get people -- how to end this war. but it is not my intention to stay there for a long time but the question is, how and under what circumstances do we meet that agreement that was made by president trump to leave under a deal that looks like it's not being able to be worked out to begin with. how's that done? we are not staying a long time. >> you just said -- do you think

it's possible that - >> we will leiave. the question is when we leave. >> do you believe it's possible to have troops there next year >> i can't picture that being the case okay kristen? >> thank you very much, mr. president. given the conditions that were just laid out at the migrant facilities at the u.s. border, will you commit to allowing journalists to have access to the facilities that are o overcrowded moving forward >> i will commit when my plan very shortly is under way to let you have access to those facilities and others. >> how soon will journalists have access to the facilities? we have been inside one but we haven't seen the facilities in

which children are packed together to really give the american people a chance to see that will you commit to transparency on this issue? >> i will commit to transparency and as soon as i'm in a position to be able to implement what we're doing right now. one of the reasons i haven't gone down, i have all my chief folks have gone down, is i don't want to become the issue i don't want to be bringing all the secret service and everybody with me to get in the way. so this is being set up. and you'll have full access to everything once we get this thing moving. >> okay. just to be clear, how soon will that be, mr. president >> i don't know. to be clear. >> do you bear responsibility for everything that's happening at the border now? i hear you talking about the past administration. you decided to roll back some of those policies did you move too quickly to -- >> what? i'm sorry? >> did you move too quickly to

roll back some of the executive orders of your predecessor >> first of all, all the policies were not helping at all. did not slow the amount of immigration and as many people coming and rolling back the policies of separating children from their mothers? make no apology for that rolling back the policies of remain in mexico, sitting on the edge of rio grande with not enough to eat. i make no apologies for ending programs that did not exist before trump became president that have an incredibly negative impact on the law, international law, as well as on human dignity. so i make no apologies for that. >> if i could ask you about foreign policy, mr. president. overnight we learned that north korea tested two ballistic missls what if any actions will you

take and what is your red line on north korea >> let me say that, number one, u.n. resolution 1718 was violated by those particular missiles that were tested. number one we're consulting with our allies and partners there will be responses if they choose to escalate we will respond accordingly. but i'm also prepared for some form of diplomacy but it has to be conditioned upon the end result of denuclearization so that's what we're doing right now, consulting with our allies. >> just very - >> you only have another hour.

>> former president obama warned the incoming president trump that north korea was the top foreign policy issue that he was watching is that how you assess the crisis in north korea? >> yes okay hang on a second here. kristen. nancy, cbs >> thank you very much, mr. president. i want to go back to voting rights and as yamiche mentioned, republican legislatures are working to pass bills that could restrict voting, particularly democrats fear minority voters and young voters are you worried that if you don't manage to pass voting rights legislation that your party is going to lose seats and possibly lose control of the house and the senate in 2022 >> what i'm worried about is how

un-american this whole initiative is. it's sick. it's sick. deciding in some states that you cannot bring water to people standing in line waiting to vote deciding that you're going to end voting at 5:00 when working people are just getting off work deciding that there will be no absentee ballots under the most rigid circumstances? it's all designed and i'm going to spend my time doing three things one, trying to figure out how to pass legislation passed by the house, number one. number two, educating the american public, the republican voters i know find this despicable republican voters. folks out in the -- outside this white house. i'm not talking about the electe