opportunities to participate in the equally participate in this takeover process with others leaves a lot to be desired, i will say that. and then on what lastly mention the benefits i mentioned in my testimony about the joint ownership and if there are opportunities, equal opportunities for folks and american transition company is a good example of this where the opportunity for broad and joint ownership by multiple entities provides planning and other benefits as well. >> mr. joos? >> i might pick up on something mr. miller said. i think that ferc's incentive policies have created a situation where not only independent transmission companies the integrated utilities that hold just a patient transmission and generation favor investment and transmission for solutions to

the problems even if they are not the most optimum solution because frankly the rates of return are higher and level a risk significantly lower than other kind of investments that might be under state regulatory policy for example with the ferc has put in place. so our concern as you see the rush to invest in transmission line want to clarify again there are transmission projects that make sense and they make good economic sense they ought to be supported. i think we have to be careful not to incident investment because of the low risk negative return environment, the sevi the public interest therefore i do think broad public planning of some nature is necessary with broad participation. >> mr. izzo? >> in the regulated transition business provides reliable the

99.99% of the time for a regional planning process it works and it works well and that is regulated upon the cost of service. our unregulated generation business always has to consider the cost of connecting to the grade as part of its investment strategy and bears that cost. we need to dispel the notion that they are now being built because the transmission system. they are not being built because we are now sending clear price signals. the committee deserves congratulations for cap and trade and for setting and our es and being at risk the next thing i expect to hear from people is if only we had refrigerated freight trains running free of charge from the gospel our local supermarket would get its ice cubes from there. it doesn't make sense to ignore the charges. >> i want to thank all of you gentlemen again for your time and expertise and patience. before i adjourn, i need to ask

a man must consent that to letters from ferc to chairman markey are put in the record, without objection so ordered and with that our hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

for

mal a look at what u.s. residents think of attempts to change the current health care system. quinnipiac university polling institutes completed a survey. we will hear from the institute's assistant director during this 15 minute news conference. >> good morning. i am peter brown, assistant director of the quinnipiac polling institute here to talk about the new poll we released this morning -- excuse me, about american attitudes toward health care reform. many of you have the poll in front of you but let me touch some of the highlights and then i would be happy to take questions. first, quinnipiac, which is a private university in

connecticut does polling for research purposes, and we do monthly national polls. we do polls on specific subjects, and we are proud of the fact that our polls are perhaps the largest on bye anybody. on this one we have a 3,000 persons sampled which is large for a national public opinion poll. most runabout 1200. the highlights. among the big booms of contention in health care reform else congress and the president wrestle with how will the details will be is whether or not there should be a public plan option for people in other words should there be a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurance. most americans, 69% think that there should be. they very much want one. conversely only 28% of them say they will utilize it. a bit of a dichotomy. people want the option but don't want to use it themselves.

they are so skeptical about government run health insurance. one of the other big issues is cost. as you may know, chris is trying to put together a plan somewhere between $1,000,000,000,001.5 trillion. when we asked voters how much more they are willing to pay for national health care reform, we get some answers that don't add up to 1 trillion or $1.5 trillion. by and large voters will be happy to have higher taxes on the rich and on business to finance it. but they are skeptical about taxes for the rest of everybody else. 49% of voters say they would pay higher taxes for health care reform, 45% say they pay no higher taxes for health care reform. of the 45%, of the 49% who say they would pay higher taxes more than half of them say they will only pay up to $500 a year more,

that is $10 a week or the cost of a cheese pizza once a week without toppings. so, there is something of a dichotomy feeling here among the electorate. some of the of their key findings. voters are not happy about the notion that everybody would be forced to have health insurance coverage, what's called the individual mandate that's an issue that's before congress and some people want in the plan. they also are unhappy about prospect that health insurance benefits employees get at work which currently are not taxed would be taxed. that idea is quite unpopular. voters oppose it about 2-1. to sum up, it is a fair analysis to say that most voters want health care reform. but what health care reform

means is different things to different people. we asked for instance what was more important, lowering cost or covering everyone and a majority said lowering their cost. i will be happy to take your questions in detail. that's just a brief overview of the findings. yes, ma'am. >> can you talk about the breakdown between democrats and republicans? >> is there a question that you're interested in? >> about polling republicans -- >> in generally republicans are more tax at first and skeptical of a government run health insurance program. there's nothing counterintuitive there. but there are an awful lot of people who are not republicans who are skeptical about government run health insurance. one of the other questions we asked wallace whether they thought of the government did

offer their own plan to compete with private insurance plans that would drive private insurance plans out of business and what would be left would be a government run health care plan and whether people thought that was a good or bad idea. most people think that's a bad idea. they don't want a government-run health insurance system and obviously the people who feel strongly about it tend to be republican but for instance, let me give you a couple ideas or questions on -- on the question are you willing to pay more taxes for a health insurance plan overall 49% say they are, 45% say they are not the only 23% of republicans are willing to pay more. 71% of democrats are willing to pay more. and interestingly independent source put down des moines mittal, 48% say they will, 47% say they wouldn't. that's a good way of explaining the part you asked about.

one of the other interesting -- if you want demographics, is by age young people are willing to pay taxes for a national health plan of some sort. 61% of voters between 18 and 34 say they would be willing. that is significantly higher than the 49% over all. but among older voters the number drops precipitously. those 55 only 44% say they are willing to pay more taxes and in the elderly those over 55 are willing to pay more taxes. if you break it along racial lines, whites are less likely, only 45% say they are willing to pay more taxes for a national health plan. african-americans, 73%, hispanics, 53%. so there are demographic differences in the electorate on this issue as many other issues

involving taxing and government spending. yes, ma'am. >> held out the minority attitude toward health care reform? >> i'm sorry? >> minority, i mean for the hispanic work, how do they think about the reform? >> well, again, we don't have a sample of asian americans. on the question whether they would be willing to pay more taxes, african-americans are more willing. as i said 73% said they would be building to pay more taxes for a national health plan. but only 53% of hispanics are willing to pay more taxes for a national health plan. whites are not.

only 45% are willing to pay more taxes for a national health plan and that pattern is pretty similar throughout. yes, ma'am. >> if most americans don't want to choose to be covered by a government run health insurance, like most people think there should be one? >> that's the dichotomy. yes, people want a government-run plan as an option, but they are candidly the only reason they are losing suspicious of whether they want to trust their health or their families' health. there's a skepticism about government in the country and a whole variety of factors. opponents of the obama administration has painted a picture of a government run health care plan much like in europe and great britain and americans have not a great view of that plan. they read stories about waits

for care and it's covered by their tax money, that is the europeans. americans are clearly weary and you can see in the numbers they think they should have the option they just don't want for themselves or their families. >> one of the ever interesting aspects of the poll is that we asked people, let me find the question. what is clear is that the voters don't think there should be a radical restructuring of their

taxes to pay for health care. again, they are happy to have business to it and strong support for making business to eight. but they don't want to for instance beef forced to have health insurance. as you may know on the negotiations, the health insurance companies that are trying to have influence they have said they are willing to go to, you know, be part of this but want to make sure all americans are covered the reason being is that people -- the insurance companies want government -- everybody to sign up for a plan, a private plan because they think that will defray the cost because the people not getting insurance specifically the young have lower health care bills and americans know that but their resistance and the notion of they have to have health insurance. yes, ma'am. >> what do you make of the numbers on approval or disapproval of the way the president is handling health

care? >> what is the question number on that? >> eight. >> obviously the number is not all that impressive. 46% say if a thumbs-up, 42%, give a thumbs down. that is less than in the public opinion polls these days. the job approval rating is generally in the mid to high fifties in most so this is obviously an area voters are more skeptical and given the publicity we have seen about this. again, it's important to remember there is a pretty clear consensus voters favor some kind of change in health care but the devil is in the details.

most people define health insurance overhaul they want to see as one that will burst their cost. others a minority that sizable minority think health care reform means covering everybody so there is that taricani there that reflects the fact that americans in general they like the idea but the devil is in the details and they are specifics that they are not thrilled with. >> anything else? yes? >> al mulken, media. was their anything that struck

you as a surprising that you were not expecting from these results? >> there has been in lot of polling in health care recently so we were trying to do some questions that some have and so one thing that surprised me is the number of people who favored a public plan and then the relatively small number said they would be willing to use it. as i told someone earlier i think that reflects a general skepticism about government's role in things and the opponents have done a good job of talking about the european health care system and perhaps some of the received false. that to me was somewhat noteworthy. the other thing is the cost question. 72% of the voters say they would only be willing to spend up to $500 in new taxes to pay for what is going to be a trillion dollar plan. that strikes me to something of disconnect. i think the public perception of how big the cost is going to be

doesn't jive when you do the math. and frankly almost half of them wouldn't pay any taxes, 45% so you have a bit of a disconnect. voters were finding that they are happy to have business pay for this to have the rich pay for it, but if you get past that they are less willing to spend their money for health care overhaul it appears. >> was there any question that dealt with the media and the winds and comparisons with what was happening in the 90's? >> no, there was launched. -- there was not. anything else? thank you.

[inaudible conversations] >> anybody that came in late -- [inaudible conversations]

how is c-span funded? >> publicly funded. >> donations may be i have no idea. >> government. >> c-span gets its government through the taxes. >> federal funding. >> maybe i don't know. >> how is c-span fund? 30 years ago america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. a private business initiative. no government mandate, no government money. now in the event with colombian president alvaro velez uribe. the woodrow wilson international center for scholars hosts this event. you will hear an introduction by former indiana congressman and vice-chairman lee hamilton. this is about an hour. >> good morning.

please be seated. it is my pleasure to welcome you to the directors forum with the president of the republic of columbia, alvaro uribe. we welcome you to the center and welcome the colombian minister of affairs, the minister of trade, colombia's ambassador to the united states, the minister of finance, and i am told there are several ambassadors in the group and we certainly welcome them here. i've also been informed that ms. babich is here. yes, former ambassador. and i am not sure whether former congressman jim kolbe is with us, i don't see him but he's

expected to be here. we welcome each of the distinguished guests and of course we welcome the president. i want to thank this event's co-sponsors, the inter-american dialogue, the council of the americas represented here today by the dialogue president, peter hakim and eric fonts' -- fonzworth. president alvaro uribe was elected in 2002. he inherited tremendous challenges, decades of violence that plagued his country but under his leadership over the last seven years columbia has made remarkable strides towards peace, security, stability and prosperity. he expanded the armed forces. he oversaw the demobilization of over 30,000 paramilitary fighters, ferc and eln suffered

more than 10,000 defections and numerous setbacks at the hands of government forces. including the rescue of three united states citizens and several other hostages nearly a year ago. 2006 the colombian people demonstrated their support by reelecting a president by an impressive 62% margin. and his high public approval rating remains the envy of politicians across the world. all of this is coincided with of the strengthening of bilateral relations between washington. while columbia continues to face significant challenges, they are challenges that washington can work to overcome. as all colombians seek to build upon the gains of recent years, strengthening their democracy and contribute to a brighter future for not just their own country but the hemisphere.

under president bill clinton and george w. bush the bilateral relationship between the united states and colombia has grown by leaps and bounds and it is our expectation this trend will continue under president obama. the president's tenure caps a distinguished career in public service. 1976, he served as head of the real estate office of the public works department. he went on to serve as secretary general of the labor minister, head of the civil aviation department, the mayor and two terms as the senator and governor. he holds a degree from the university as well as postgraduate degree from harvard. he's also an associate professor. he was at oxford university. he is married, has two sons.

mr. president, thank you for coming to the wilson center and we look forward to your comments. after he speaks there will be an opportunity for questions and answers. mr. president. [applause] >> mr. lee hamilton, president wilson center, mr. hakim, president of inter-american dialogue, my colleagues in government, ambassador, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honor for my colleagues and for me to be here this morning in this very important think tank.

i want to express our gratitude for this invitation. every day i repeat before my son -- fellow citizens one symbol frame and i do my best to repeat this. morning by morning, evening by evening, because i understand that every government has to convince the fellow citizens about the necessity to have important honor at the same time simple goals. the goal we are looking for in colombia is to bring columbia into a country with the highest level of confidence.

confidence is the keyword. we support confidence upon three pillars. security with space values, investment with responsibility, and social competion. we can see that the only way for a country such as the case of columbia will to advance in and overcoming poverty and creating a civil community with a better income distribution is through prosperity and prosperity depends in the case of columbia on security and on investment. security with space values, investment resource and responsibility. ..