when i was asked this question, i thought about it for a while. and at first i gave consideration to the usual suspects, business books, philosophy books, history books and the like. and i wound up suggesting two classics by lewis carol. the first was alice's adventures in wonder land and the second was through the looking glass. in the first alice finds herself in all kinds of curious predicaments. in her words they were curiouser and curiouser. and in that world she was in a world where your sense of reality completely fails and nonsense becomes the norm. and through the looking glass she finds herself in a place where she actually has to go in the opposite direction in order to be able to get anywhere. and this is why i picked those books. in these times it's often wise to consider going the opposite direction from the rest of the herd. and as strange as this world has

become, sometimes even falling down the rabbit hole can bring you strange and unexpected delights and as with the economy, sometimes you just have to go with the force of gravity. the fact is that this economy is certainly presenting many challenges for nonprofits but it's also providing the impetus for the american red cross and other nonprofits to make needed and in some cases overdue changes. simp and the economy is roaring problems can be glossed over. prosperity can actually cover a multitude of sins. we need to leverage the economy and the force of gravity to be able to effect change. so let me suggest five ways that can help nonprofits successfully navigate these turbulent waters. first, have a monomenical focus on your mission and on the

people that you serve. more and more people are hurting because of the economy and they put their trust in the american red cross to be there in times of emergency. to be there in times of need. many people think about us during catastrophic disasters or when they need blood or when they're perhaps donating blood but consider this, 200 times a day american red cross volunteers help a family who have lost everything in either a house fire or another disaster. 475 times a day the red cross connects men and women that serve in the armed forces to their families. 21,000 times a day someone receives a blood transfusion from a red cross donor. and, in fact, the national press club does blood drives here and we're very appreciative of that. 43,000 times a day, a person

receives lifesaving training, in health, training, preparedness and safety from the red cross. 290,000 times a day a child receives a measles vaccine from the red cross or one of its partners and the less time it took me to make that statement, 150 different lives were either served or touched by the american red cross. when i think of the spirits of the men and women in the armed forces who we lift, when i think of the remarkable act of our donors that actually open up their veins to give the gift of blood, when i think of the millions of people that we train to save lives and when i think of the people that we help in their darkest hours, when they've lost everything and they're turning to us just for the basic needs of food and shelter, i am absolutely awe-struck by the responsibility that we have to our citizens and to our country. despite growing bills from the

storms, the tornadoes, the wildfires and the floods we could not and did not walk away. then and now the red cross will not pack up and go home if there's even one person left. in one of our shelters. as leaders of nonprofits, we have to make every single decision through the lens of our mission. the country depends on us all to do so. we need to look at everything that we do and every dime that we spend and eliminate all extraneous activities that don't support the people that we serve, and that brings me the second key for successfully navigating through these rough waters. we must be even better stewards of our donors' dollars. we have to be relentless in demonstrating that their hard-earned money is being well spent. since donors are finding it harder and harder to give, we have to show them that we are being as efficient as humanly

possible. we're very proud of the fact that 90 cents of every dollar goes to the people that we serve but we have to find even more ways to be smarter in how we run the organization. and this has been one of my major areas of focus. we have 33,000 employees. we have 722 local chapters. we have 36 blood services regions. and we have over half a million volunteers. we have to ensure that we streamline all of our operations and to do so we've made some governance changes. we're consolidating our chapters back off this operations. we're sharing best practices and promoting teamwork. our thinking behind these changes is actually very simple. we just can't do the same thing 722 different ways. our local chapters are absolutely the heart and soul of the american red cross. it is a grassroots organization.

and we need to free up those chapters so that we can focus on the mission and avoid having each local leader focusing on things like finance, payroll and accounting systems. we're also reducing expenses in a variety of other ways to adjust that $209 million deficit i mentioned. we're reducing travel expenses, telecom expenses, vendor costs. we're even renting out floors from our headquarters building. we had to lay off over 1,000 people in headquarters and over 350 people in the field ensuring that it has no impact at all on our mission or on the people that we serve. and i know given this economy, that all of you are used to hearing stories like this. you're used to hearing about cost-cuts and head count reductions, but just pause for a second and consider the implications of this in the nonprofit world.

employees join nonprofits because they truly want to make a difference in the world. they're drawn to the mission. they want to give back. in short, they're humanitarians. so imagine in that environment how painful it was to see your fellow employee lose their job. this was extremely difficult for us. and it is my fervent hope that we won't need for make these kinds of cuts again. we've also made some tough decisions that caused every employee to have to make sacrifices. freezing merit increases for all of our nonunion employees. suspending our 401k match. closing off our pension plans to any employees that join the american red cross after july 1st and, you know, what, i haven't heard a single complaint. employees, in fact, have reached out to thank me. the feeling is that people would rather sacrifice a pay increase

than seeing a colleague lose their job. and this was just one of those unexpected surprises that come from falling down the rabbit hole, i suppose. i'm very proud to say because of the collective efforts of the entire organization, we drove down that $209 million deficit to $50 million in just one year. an extraordinary achievement. that's actually 86 million better than we thought we would be at this point and we're working very hard to try to balance the rest of the budget for next year. and that actually brings me to the third key factor. nonprofits have to find new ways to raise money and to engage their donors. we've been working very hard just to do that at the american red cross. in september in the heart of hurricane season, we launched a $100 million campaign to replenish our depleted disaster

relief fund. this was certainly an audacious goal considering that the disaster relief fund was actually empty when we started. in just nine months we surpassed that goal. i'm delighted to report that we raised $95 million in cash and $15 million in in-kind donations in the most challenging times in a quarter of a century. how did we do that? well, first the field and headquarters teamed flawlessly to approach our large donors. the fields are also using state coordinators so they can share best practices around the country. we're using blue state digital and that's the digital media agency that worked to raise funds for the obama campaign. in order to make a stronger push on line. we were able to raise $1 million online with blue state digital in just three weeks, and the average donation size was less than $100 apiece.

we're using grassroots techniques like the national day of giving during which time we send all the chapters out into the street, everyone in headquarters out in the street to start raising funds. and they did everything from bake sales to public services announcements and local athletic events and we raised $850,000. in other words we used a combination of tactics from good old-fashioned community outreach to digital media. and what we learned is the key is to set your sights very high and try lots and lots of different approaches. and we are thankful for every single dollar that was donated and needed to assist the victims of the disasters of 2008. the generosity of the american public never ceases to amaze me. i also have to think members of congress who allocated up to $100 million to the red cross to cover the unusually heavy costs

that we incurred in 2008. we are not a government agency. and our funding comes from private donations. but in this crazy year, we need help from our government and we are grateful for their response. we're heading into this next fiscal year with limited funds but we are absolutely in much better shape than we were this time last year. we're now raising money to respond to disasters in the months ahead. our goal is not to just raise money episodecally during a disaster but to make sure we have the funds before a disaster strikes. we respond to 70,000 disasters every year. and we spend on average $500 million annually to do so. and by the way, the national weather service is predicting a normal hurricane season. and that means that there are going to be four to seven hurricanes and one to three of

them will be major ones. and regarding major disasters, a big lesson that we learned during katrina was that building relationships with other nonprofits in the community is absolutely essential to help serve people in need. we built relationships with local churches, synagogues, mosques. we're partnering with community organizations like 100 black men, the naacp, other agencies like salvation army, southern baptist convention, catholic charities. our model is to be collaborative. our model is to be inclusive and our model is to be diverse. it really does take an entire community to be able to respond to a major disaster. we need the support of our partners and the american public now more than ever. our donors are telling us that it's harder and harder to give right now. but they're also telling us that it feels better than ever.

the fourth way for nonprofits to survive in these turbulent times is to embrace new tools. disaster victims, volunteers, financial and blood donors want information quickly and they rely on new forms of communications in order to get. in the nightly news and newspapers are obviously very important fabric of communications but more and more people of all ages are getting immediate information from the web and from their phone. nonprofits have to embrace these new forms of media. now, this probably sounds to you like a complete obvious set of statements that i just made. but again, pause for a moment. we are a 128-year-old institution so don't underestimate the massive change in mindset that this requires. we are not google. we are not apple.

but we realize it's essential to embrace new technology and we are leveraging it each and every day. we are tweeting. we are all over facebook. i am personally blogging. these tools can carry multiple messages to either a firm or an institution's constituents but more importantly they also can connect constituents to each other. when i got my mba, i was taught in marketing that there are two different kinds of models. business to business communications, and business to consumer communications. but while i was teaching at harvard business school i realized that the most important communications is actually consumer to consumer. consumers trust each other. think of your own habits you. probably get on the web before you buy a book, go to a movie, go to a restaurant, consumers want to talk behind the institution's back. they want to talk about our brands. and we have to facilitate that

conversation. i mentioned earlier that blue state digital helped us raise a million dollars online. they've also helped us to connect our donors and our volunteers together. they helped us write -- do an essay contest where you could actually write in 75 words or less why you love the american red cross. and they posted those so others could enjoy them. they helped our donors matched gifts from other donors. they had us all over facebook. there was a mad viral frenzy when target put up $3 million and said we are going to give this out proportionately by votes to these ten charities. and everyone was clicking like crazy. we got $794,000, 26.6% of the votes all because of viral communications. it was amazing. we've also sent emails with tips to prevent the spread of the h1n1 virus. we had a lot of funds sending

emails from heidi klum the runway model and the second baseman from the new york yankee about taking cpr training and these activities have brought us 9,000 new donors. 6% of them committed to sustainable giving, meaning that they would give $20 at least each and every month. but as importantly it, shows that despite many challenges, a 128-year-old institution can participate in the digital age and this brings me to the final key success factor in these times, which is keep looking to the horizon. cost consciousness is definitely a critical element for nonprofits but it's just going to take you so far. we also need to ensure that we look towards the future to stay relevant and to bro. -- grow. a couple of weeks i met with the

senior leaders from our chapters across the country and we conducted a series of brainstorming exercises. i provided the group with a picture of what i thought the world might look like in the year 2020. now, i tend to be an optimist so my 2020 vision is extremely rosy. but i painted a picture where the population is shifting and america is embracing diversity. where most schools and most businesses have as a requirement that their students and their employees volunteer. that detroit develops a smoking hot electric car that takes the world by storm. that jobs are created in the alternate energy sector and hundreds and hundreds of people are finding work because of it. the dow is at 17,000. [laughter] >> it's possible. anyway, you get my drift. i asked the groups to generate ideas that would help the american red cross grow and

prosper during this kind of time and the ideas that they came up with were creative, wild, whacky and they truly showed out of the box thinking. the exercise has me thinking of creating my own futurist group composed of volunteers that will help us keep our eye on the horizon. you know, you can easily imagine a world where the obama administration's united we serve initiative is the beginning of a whole new era of volunteerism and service. where that a culture of service extends from the retired baby boomer to tomorrow's teens. the power of volunteerism is absolutely incredible. through volunteerism, you can change the lives of others starting with your own. as ralph waldo emerson once said, it's one of the most beautiful compensations of this life that no man can help another without helping himself. in the last year, i have seen

example after example of that of the american red cross. i go to a lot of our blood collection sites. i met a woman who donates blood because she has a 3-year-old child with leukemia and she gets a lot of blood transfusions. i met a man whose best friends was in a car accident and had 12 blood transfusions and this is the way he gives back. i actually met a man in his 60s who had donated 49 gallons of blood. and when i asked him why he would do such a thing, he said it's because i love the american red cross and it's the right thing to do. i met a mother who thanked me for how the red cross helped her in her time of need when she lost her son in afghanistan. i also had the privilege of attending a wal-mart store meeting where there were thousands of store managers, and i tested out the following. i was told that 1 in 5 people in

the united states have been touched by the american red cross. so i asked the store manager, stand up if you donated blood and raise a hand if you've had cpr training and raise a hand if you've had lifeguard training. on and on i went through every single element of our mission and when i was done as far as the eye can see the audience stood up with both hands in the air. i had the privilege of being with our volunteers during ike and gustav. it was amazing. i was on an emergency response vehicle. i was wearing a red cross t-shirt and for hours i was ladling out chili for people in the community that had lined up as far as the eye can see to get their first meal after they had lost everything. i went straight from that experience to an airplane, still in my red cross t-shirt and i have to tell you, i smelled. i smelled from chili.

i smelled from perspiration. i was afraid they were going to have to evacuate the plane as i was walking down the aisle. and you know what? they dñ evacuate the plane. people were touching my arms because they could see my t-shirt. and they were thanking me for helping them in the state of texas. i heard this all the way home literally until÷ i went in the front door of my apartment where my doorman said to me, thank you, mrs. mcgovern, for serving our country. i have never

when times are rough, the country needs us more than ever. and that's when we are at our best. thank you. [applause] >> okay. we got a big pile of questions here so we'll get started with those. do you expect nonprofit donations to pick up as soon as the u.s. economy does or will americans be accustomed to giving less? >> well, as i said, i am so taken aback by the generosity of the american public. and when nonprofits seek their help, they tend to be right there to help. and i believe that when the economy bounces back, that people will reach into their hearts and their wallets and even their veins and continue to help nonprofits serve the rest

of the country. >> given all the leadership of the red cross why should i choose organization to receive my charitable dollars. >> well, i'm going to twist the question and answer the following which i guess all the time, are you planning on being there for a while. which is really the crux of your question. i think they're going to have to drag me out of the american red cross. i truly have fallen in love. you will find my fingernails scratched across the desk when they pull me out and i actually had one employee that said to me, so are you going to be here i a long time and i said i intend to. she said for 25 years? and i said i will be 81 then and i doubt i will be here then but i'm hoping that with this fabulous management team that we have and the talent at the american red cross throughout the entire organization, the

passion and the commitment that the tumult will have stopped and we will be the charity of choice for people to give their dollars. >> what types of steps are you taking to regain public trust? >> i feel the best way to gain publicy is through action. and you mentioned in your opening remarks, wç'na, that we performed well in gustav and ike. we in my opinion performed flawlessly. at one point we had 60,000 people in our shelters. we served 8 million meals in just 60 days.qgq and the press didn't make a peep and that's because we really were there and we did the right things. and we did this despite accelerating costs, and i think that's the way you gain the trust of the american public by serving the mission, by no missteps and that's the way people will continue to trust the american red cross brand. >> did that performance

translate into an uptick in donations? >> it certainly did. i believe that's why we were able to raise the $100 million for the disaster relief fund in just 9 months. that was extraordinary. it exceeded our wildest dreams. i have to tell you it was one of the craziest things i had ever done launching a campaign with zero dollars starting out and i said the american public came uárough for us and the gifts >> do you think obama's focus on encouraging public service will translate into more donations forh$(ájuáhp'd other charities? i think that not only will it translate into more donations, but it's going to translate into more volunteers. i mentioned that we have over half a million volunteers at the american red cross and we do what we do in an efficient way because we have a volunteer force. so i'm very optimistic that it translates into donations and i'm also very optimistic that it will translate into additional

ow and legs for nonprofits because volunteerism is really the engine that makes us the american red cross. >> what are blood donations like as compared to monetary donations? >> meaning, what it's like to donate blood? yeah, i know. those are incredibly valued as well. we provide 43% of the nation's blood supply. and it's a very important element of our mission. so when people donate blood, it's an amazing[!j gift. and we estimate that for every single unit of blood that is donated, that it can save up to three lives so it's a very important piece of our mission and something we welcome people to participate all over the country. >> so you're speaking to a room full of reporters on deadline. and someone from the audience asks, has the red cross ever

thought about ways to speed up the blood donation process as a way to entice busy, potential blood donors? >> well, part of the blood donation process is the filling out of the patient history form. and that's really the key to make sure that our blood supply is safe so we ask a lot of questions and each and every question is there for a reason. we do so to make sure that the blood that we provide to hospitals for their lifesaving mission is absolutely safe. that part probably won't be shortened. the technology is in the way of being able to extract the blood quicker but havingbc said that,f you make an appointment when you go to a blood drive, it'll cut some of the time down and our goal is to get people in and out as quickly as possible. >> just as long as you don't eliminate the cookie portion. [laughter] >> what have you done to fix the problems managing blood donations, storage and

distribution that resulted in the fine? >> so we are spending an incredible amount of time ensuring that our blood products are safe. and over the last 18 months we've consolidated testing and manufacturing we've seen a 30% of decrease in problems that are severe. so we are spending a lot of calories to ensure that the blood supply is safe. >> you came from a background in corporate america. how do you approach managing a nonprofit different from managing in the corporate sector? >> so do i come from corporate america. i also had a lot of experience in philanthropy. i was on the board of children's hospital. i'm also on the board of johns hopkins university. and i would describe leading in a nonprofit environment very

similar to a business environment. you want to make sure that you set goals. you want to make sure that you have ways to measure the goals. you want to make sure the people understand what's expected of them. and you give them feedback regularly so that they understand the mission in what you're trying to accomplish. i would say the biggest difference is that the american red cross has heart. it has an incredible amount of heart. and that passion and that commitment coupled with the talent really makes it a pleasure to lead in the nonprofit space. i said on the outside, this is absolutely the best job that i have ever had. and i feel in a lot of ways that i have been training to do this my entire life. .. of heart as well.

>> can you describe your relationship with the board of directors? has the cold war thought of it? >> i am glad you asked that question. i have the best board. i have the dream team on our board of governors and they made some very difficult decisions. before i arrived, that caused them to shrink the size of the board. our board of governors are smart, fabulous sounding board. i'm on the phone with them regularly, i enjoy every interaction with them, we have great grass this mines, a entrepreneurs, philanthropists,

it is one of the reasons i love this job, and one of the reasons i agreed to join the american red cross. and our share is phenomenal. she is just amazing. >> how much of the red cross's deficit is related to the economy and how much is related to other factors such as management decisions? >> the $209 million i described when i first came to the american red cross existed before the economy entered into a recession. i would say that a lot of it was just making sure, as i said earlier, that we look at everything we did through the lens of our mission and made sure we remove any extraneous activities. i would say the $50 million that we are now having is largely due to the economy. we are assuming that donations

will be down somewhat, and that is baked into our activities, and impacting us, as you would suspect. but the last dollars are the hardest to find, we are bound and determined to have a balanced budget in fiscal year 2010. >> you, like most nonprofits, had to scramble for monetary donations. how about from volunteers? do you have a surplus, a shortage? tell us about their quality. >> volunteers having spent a lotme. all of our boards, local chapter boards, are all volunteers. the people that served came from 40 different states and dropped everything to help people in need during that disaster, and we can always use more volunteers. the country can always use more people that are stepping up to

serve. our volunteers come from every walk of life, from every age, every demographic, from every educational background. they are a pleasure to work with, and i would encourage anyone who wants to give back to consider doing so with the american red cross. >> so how are your numbers? do you have a shortage or a surplus? >> right now we have what we need. however, we can put anyone to work that wants to volunteer. i am serious about that. we are very prepared during this upcoming hurricane season, we feel we are going to be in very good shape, but having said that, we would love anyone to become part of the red cross family, and we will put anyone to work, whether it is for an hour or to spend three weeks at a disaster. the bulk of as many volunteers as possible but we feel we are going into this hurricane season

very well prepared. >> are there particular skills, or people who speak particular languages that you are most in need of? >> we welcome diversity, that is very important as we go into various different communities. in terms of the skills, if you have a hard, if you want to help, if you want to give back, if you can be a shoulder for people to cry on, if you can give a hug, you can be a volunteer for the american red cross. >> what percentage of your donations are small vs. large? what is the average donation size? >> when it comes to individual giving the average donation side is $23,000 today knowledge number of our guests come from big donors, big corporations and big foundations and they step up for us all the time. when i look at those gifts, is a

range from $250,000 up to the walmart gifts which was $5 million. it depends on which segment of the market you are looking at. >> the essence of marketing, someone in the audience said, consumer to consumer, how do you utilize that in marketing the red cross? >> whoever asked the question, i could not agree more. people that don't facilitate that conversation between consumers and consumers, actually, i believe, are at risk of having their brands hijacked because people will have that conversation with you are engaged or not. we are seeking ways to create a movement of people that want to be part of the american red cross. little bit retro because years ago you did join the red cross and we would like to create a movement where people meet each other, with a social network, where they talk about their volunteer experiences or experiences they had in

classrooms. we are working to make sure we facilitate that conversation because when donors talk to donors it is extraordinary. we have a facebook page for blood donors. if you read the stories it is phenomenal what people will do to help people out. >> can we friend you on facebook? >> i have a face book confession to make. i was on facebook but i have so many people reaching me through e-mails, bloging and everything else that i took my countdown. but i am thinking of putting it back a because i do get that question quite a bit. keep an eye out for me. when i come back, you absolutely can all friend me. >> we move on to the swine flu. has planning for swine flu been a bigger priority than planning

for a natural disasters such as the hurricane? >> i say they are equal priority. they are linked. on a regular basis to make sure we are there to help disseminate information, we can do community outreach to make sure people understand the best way to spread -- prevent the spread of the violence and in terms of how we shelled if there is a spread of swine flu. we are focusing probably equal amounts on both. our plan is to be there when the cdc needs us to be sure we educate the country, whether it is good old-fashioned grass roots sheets that we bring into the community or posting information online. the e-mail that i mentioned earlier on this line flu, preventing its spread, had 36,000 clicks in the first

couple days. we are very much about making sure the country is prepared to deal with the virus. >> how vulnerable is the country to a spanish flu style outbreak of flu, and is there something people should be doing that the red cross is recommending folks do now? >> the question of vulnerability is probably better posed to medical health professional or somebody at the cdc. in terms of preventing the spread of virus, it is watching your hands a lot. it is making sure when you are touching surfaces, when you are traveling, you are constantly using sanitizers or washing your hands a lot. we have a lot of tips to prevent the spread on the web site, and we would welcome listeners and readers to educate themselves to make sure they can help prevent the spread of the virus.

>> has the red cross defined what its role would be under a worst-case scenario with swine flu? >> first of all, it is education. as i mentioned, we have agreed to educate the community because we are a grass-roots organization. we have chapters all around the country. education is a very important role. we will also be there to distribute, breaks through the vaccine if necessary, not to let minister it, but to beat the arms and legs of the community to make sure the vaccine that's where it needs to be and we are focused on making sure that we have a good supply of blood which is part of our mission. >> the red cross did well last year during hurricanes gustav and ike but they were not the scope of katrina. if there is another katrina or

major natural challenge of that scope is the red cross prepared? >> ike and gustav or almost the scale of katrina, didn't get the same press coverage as katrina, but we had 60,000 people in our shelters, and served eight million meals in sixty days. it was a massive undertaking and we are prepared for this hurricane season, we have 48,000 different shelter locations, we will be able to feed 1 million meals a day if necessary. we serve those for a much better way. our relationship with fema was stronger than ever.

>> can you give us some examples of how disaster response has changed since hurricane katrina, some lessons learned? if a hurricane hit tomorrow, what could the victims expect from the red cross? >> in addition to learning that we had to have partnerships on the ground in the community, we have also gotten warehouses throughout disaster prone areas and supplies. it is there and it is ready, and that is a very import dow element of making sure that we are prepared. we need to educate the american public which we do on an ongoing basis that they should be prepared as well particularly those in disaster crown areas. and a battery operated radio, preparedness is lucky. we need the country to be

prepared, we need to employers to make sure they have the evacuation plans. everyone should have a contact list, who is going to pick up my kid if disaster strikes, where are we going to go, what is our evacuation plan, we are constantly educating the public to take those 3 steps, have a kid, have a plan and stay informed. that will go along way in helping the nation be prepared. >> as the disaster reporter for usa today i have seen some really strange donations including a pair of snow skis during a hurricane in pensacola. i am wondering if you could tell us what kinds of donations you could most use in one of the situation that is there anything you can't use? >> first of all, what we really can use during a disaster,

financial donations, we also get a lot of donations from our large corporate donors. we get water, we get snacks, we get food supplies, that sort of thing. i don't think we have much use for a pair of snowshoes in pensacola. i would just suggest that people use some common sense when they consider what kind of the nation they want to make. these don't drop off your dirty laundry. people probably don't want that. but we welcome any kinds of gifts that we can get, if your listeners and readers use good old-fashioned common sense, that will drive them to figure out what sort of donations people might need. >> how should donations be made? >> generally, they are made by dropping things off in our chapters and also by bringing things to our shelters. we welcome any kind of donations

people want to make, but the easiest kind of the nation for us to handle, as you would suspect, is financial donation, and also volunteers. that is a donation of head account we can always use during a disaster. >> does the red cross have any involvement with victims of hurricane katrina? >> we have some funds be used for recovery because katrina was an unusual circumstance where we actually raised more money than we needed to do disaster response. we are very engaged in recovery programs in katrina, telling people rebuild their homes, in communities that were hard struck, we are engaged in a number of recovery programs in the community. i had the privilege of visiting a number of families that were able to get these recovery funds

and rebuild their homes and jump-start in their communities, and it was one of the most gratifying experiences that i have had since i have in at the american red cross. i have very few pictures in my office but some that i have are pictures of these families, just giving us hugs and thanking us, is really extraordinary. that is our involvement. >> how do you protect the red cross from fraud like this had experienced during hurricane katrina when people who weren't victims claim disaster assistance? >> doing ike and gustav we focused mainly on mass care, keeping our shelters open, making sure people had a roof over their head and that they had meals. that was our main focus, therefore there wasn't a lot of fraud. having said that, you read about the dark side of human nature and when you don't read about

thousands and thousands of people that are honest and aren't committing fraud, i believe not only the american public is generous, but the american public is also extremely trustworthy. this is not something awaken the middle of the night worried about. >> the former secretary of homeland security develop the plan to embed reporters during natural disasters. is this a good idea? >> i welcome reporters to cover what we do during a disaster, i welcome reporters to volunteered during a disaster. i think they would be absolutely amazed at what the red cross and our partners do when the country needs us. i think we make a great reality tv show, actually. it is a great idea when the

american public can learn whatever they can learn. i welcome the coverage. it helps people understand our mission, it helps people be generous at the red cross, and i think it would astound and warm the hearts of the readers to see the incredible, heroes, extraordinary feats that people will go through to help each other out. >> you have talked about the work red cross does in the u.s.. what is your group's role in the red cross work internationally? >> we are part of the international federation of red cross and red crescent society. there are 186 members. believe it or not, collectively, we have ninety-seven million volunteers. it is the largest humanitarian effort in the world, and we work with our sister organizations in case there is a global disaster. during the earthquakes in china, we had people on the ground in

china, we coordinated temporary housing. during the tsunami we coordinated with our sister organization to make sure they got funds, that the american public was so generous with. we are part of the federation, we work closely together, we have great relationships. i have met many of my colleagues, and we are very proud to be part of this world wide humanitarian organization. >> we are almost out of time. before i asked last question we have a couple important matters to take care of. let me remind members of our future speakers. on july 24th, congressman john conyers, democrat from michigan and chair of the house judiciary committee will speak during a luncheon. on july 27th, congressman barney frank, a democrat from massachusetts and chairman of the house financial services committee, will be here, and on

chairman of the senate committee on foreign relations, will speak july 29th, senator john kerry, democrat from massachusetts and at a luncheon. i would like to present our guests with the coveted and pc mug. [applause] and we have time for two questions. give us a little bit of a day in the life of a disaster volunteers since you experience that last year. the you have to be retired or unemployed to be able to travel on a moment's notice? does this sort of thing? >> today in the life, first of all, is remarkably physically demanding. i will describe my particular day. we first went to a very large, empty parking lot where there were occasions that capable of making 45,000 meals a day, if you can believe that. these were industrial grade

kitchens and people were standing there cooking in absolute blistering heat, taking facts of this chili that i described and loading them onto emergency response vehicles, and this took a lot of arms and legs. a number of our volunteers are senior citizens, and i was in awe of their biceps. turned to the volunteers that don't get how they know that out where -- valley area? and he said just watch. he stopped on a corner and from out of nowhere people came, people understood, there was a big sign on the emergency response vehicles that says all this food is free. people just came, i can't even describe how many places. the line was blocks long. there were children, there were

elderly, it was extraordinary, looking in the eyes of people's faces who had just lost everything and their faces were mixed with despair but also gratitude. it was remarkable. i had a person who wanted to come and snap pictures and i was very uncomfortable about this. i said you can come for the ride but i don't want pictures. within ten minutes, he got out of the emergency response vehicle and he was handing out water and food. it absolutely gets under your skin. when you help others you are really helping yourself. in terms of who can volunteer, we have special volunteers that going to these major disasters and we like them to volunteer for three weeks at a quick. we have volunteer opportunities. we respond to 70,000 disasters every year, we have people on pagers to give people comfort, to give them help, to make sure they have a roof over their

heads, give them clothing. anyone can volunteer. as i said earlier, i have seen people from every walk of life volunteering, i have seen retired couples, young students, people in every age and bracket in between. a lot of large companies are committing to volunteer hours. if you read the annual reports, you will see a lot of firms are willing to train volunteers and send them into disasters. all kinds of people are there to help each other out. >> for our final question, someone in the audience asks, are you related to former senator george mcgovern and if so, will you admit it? >> he is my married name, my husband's family comes from tennessee. if i were related to the senator i would definitely at met it. >> okay. i would like to thank you all for coming today, i would like

to thank national press club staff members melinda cook, and nelson, joanne. and howard rossman for our -- organizing the lunch. and thanks for the research. the video archive is provided by the national press club broadcast operations center. our events are available for free download on itunes as well as on our web site. non-members may purchase transcript, audio and video tapes by calling 2026627598 or e-mail in us at archives@pres o archives@press.o archives@press.org. thank you very much, we are adjourned. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> a couple of live events to tell you about on c-span3. the house appropriations committee works on the fiscal year 2010 defense spending bill

at 9:00 a.m. eastern. at 2:00 p.m. eastern the house financial services committee continues its oversight of aid to financial institutions, the troubled asset relief program. >> join the conversation on civil-rights and release program with glen williams lives in two weeks, sunday, august 2nd, at noon eastern on booktv on c-span2. although a senate committee had earlier included money for the f-22 fighter plane, the senate voted 58-42 day to cut nearly $2 billion for the plane. this portion of the debate is an hour. >> as we consider the future of the f-22 program, it is important to remember the goal for the defense ministry, the

way we have met that goal for many decades, that goal is to give our men and women in uniform technology and equipment that is far superior to our enemy so they can respect themselves and defend our nation. our mission from the time of the wright brothers to the days of rosie the river to the era of stealth technology, maintaining that superiority has depended on an important partnership and that is the partnership between the pentagon who determines the needs of our war fighters and industry, who do the research and design and build the next generation of military couldn't that meet those needs. is a partition that is vital to our military strength, to our economy, and the health of our domestic industrial base. unfortunately it is also a partnership that is being weakened by amendments like the one we are considering today. madam president, instead of

treating military procurements like a partnership that it is, this amendment envisions it as a 1-way street. this amendment cancels a vital military program without adequate thought of the men and women we rely on to design and build the, our fight is depend on without any consideration that if we end the f-22 program, we are cutting a link in technology that we will not be able to repair overnight. as many of you know this is not the first, have come to the floor to talk about the erosion of our nation's industrial base and it won't be the last. that is because protecting our domestic base isn't about just one company or one program or one state or one industry, this is about our nation's economic stability, it is about our future military capability and

the ability to resolve skills, jobs and communities throughout the country. last week the aerospace industry association issued a major report that finds the pentagon failed to consider industrial affects when choosing strategy, that urged the pentagon to take into account the impact of decisions like the one to start taking on the manufacturing base. it also noted that our manufacturing base was not taken into account in past quadrennial defense reviews and when secretary gates unveiled this program, he specifically said defense industry jobs were not a factor in his decision. as our country faces 2 difficult but not unrelated challenges, safeguarding our country in a dangerous world and rebuilding a faltering economy, ignoring the

needs of our industrial base shouldn't be an option. whether it is scientists designing the next generation of military satellites, or whether it is the engineers who are improving our radar system or the machinists assembling our war planes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest strategic assets. what if they all of a sudden weren't available? what if we made budgetary and policy decisions that didn't take into account the needs of making sure we have a strong work force in our country? actually, that is not an possible or even unthinkable, it is happening today. we need to think about ramifications of amendments like the one we are considering today. once we give up on producing this technology, once we say that certain research and development is no longer needed, we lose that. we lose it and we cannot just

rebuild it overnight. today, as we consider a critical role in the future of our military units, we need to consider the partnership that we have to go with our industrial base, because unless we begin to consider the needs of that partnership, we are not only continue to lose some of our best american jobs, we're going to lose the backbone of our military might. supporting continued f-22 production will help defend against potential threats, it will protect jobs and most importantly, it will preserve our domestic base. that is important because we don't know what conflicts will come in the future. we don't know what our challenges will be 10, 15, 20 or 30 years from now. if we lose our engineering or production base and we face the challenge in the future and go back to rebuild that, it will never happen. we will be at a disadvantage in

whatever future conflict we might face. so madame president, i urge our colleagues to think about the long-term impact of this decision. i oppose the amendment and look forward to the further debate. thank you. mr. levin: madam president, how much time remains on our side? the presiding officer: the proponents have 35 1/2 minutes. the opponents have 18 1/2 minutes. mr. levin: i would yield the senator from arizona so much time as he requires. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: i thank you. and i again want to thank my friend, the distinguished chairman, for proposing this mendment distinguished chairman for opposing this amendment -- pardon me. excuse me, i want to thank the distinguished chairman for being the sponsor of this amendment

and it's a privilege to work with him on this as well as many other issues. this amendment is probably the most impactful amendment that i have been in this body on almost any issue much less on the issue of defense.@t& and it really boils down to whether we're going to continue the business as usual of once a weapon system gets into full production, it never dies, or weather we're going to take the necessary steps to really reform the acquisition process in this country. the f-22 in itself is $1.75 billion. that's an impressive number any place outside of the beltway. but more importantly than that,

it is a signal that we're not going to continue to build weapon systems that are plagued with cost overruns, which outlive their requirements for defending this nation and very frankly starts to gain control of the acquisition process which is completely out of control. the government accountability office recently proposed -- concluded that there were over $295 billion in cost overruns in the last several years. $295 billion in cost overruns. now, recently a close friend of mine and great leader and former secretary of the navy wrote an

article in the "wall street journal," and he stated, quote, when john mccain was shot down over hanoi in 1967, he was flying an a-4 sky hawk. that jet cost $860,000. by the way, i didn't know that cost to the taxpayers that i had caused, but the jet cost $860,000. inflation has risen by 700% since then. so mccain's a-4 cost $6.1 million in 2008 dollars. applying a generous factor for technological improvements, the price for a 2008 navy f-18 fighter should be $18 million. instead, we're paying about $90 million for each new fighter. as a result, the navy cannot buy sufficient numbers. this is disarmament without a treaty.

the situation is worse, he goes on to write -- the situation is worse in the air force. then-secretary of the navy lehman says in 1983, i was in the pentagon meeting that launched the f-22 raptor. the plan was to buy 648 jets beginning in 1996 for $60 million each. that was $1983. now they cost $350 million a piece and the obama budget cost the cost at 187 jets. then he adds, at least they're safe from cyberattack since no one in china knows how to program the '83 vintage ibm software that runs them and then goes on to cite other problems including navy ship-building fiascoes, et cetera, et cetera. the army's future combat system, which was meant to re-equip the

entire army and has had a 400% cost overrun and the new air force weather satellite with a similar cost overlun so it's out of control i say to my colleagues. i will match my commitment to equipping the men and women in the military with anyone in this body. but it's got to stop and this vote -- this vote on the f-22 will determine whether it's business as usual, with earmarking, pork barreling, billions of dollars which has bred corruption, which has bred corruption. we have former members of the united states congress residing in federal prison or whether we're going to finally get it under control and who better, frankly, to be a spokesperson in my view than our secretary of defense? i know of no secretary of defense. i've known and admired many secretaries of defense. i know of no one that i admire more than secretary gates.

he gave a very important speech yesterday on july 16th at the economic club of chicago, a remarkable speech. i hope all of my colleagues would have a chance to read it. part of it he says, about the problems that we're having in defense spending. first, there's the congress, which is understandably concerned especially in these tough economic times about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. there's the defense in aerospace industry which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of these programs. and there's the institutional military itself, within the pentagon and expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry and some who often are quoted as experts in the news media. as a result, secretary gates goes on to say, many past attempts by my predecessor to end failing or unnecessary

programs went by the wayside. nonetheless, i determined in a triumph of hope over experience and the president agreed -- and i want to emphasize my strong support and appreciation for the president's stand on this issue -- and the president agreed that given the urgency of the wars we're in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for years to come and our country's economic problems we simply cannot afford to move forward with business as usual. and then later on he talks about the f-22. air superiority in missile defense, two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism provide case studies. let me start with the controversy over the f-22 fighter jet. we had to consider when preparing for a future potential conventional state on state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to

deal with the projected threats to u.s. air supremacy. for example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles that can simultaneously perform intelligence reconnaissance, et cetera, and the president's budget would buy 48 of the most advanced uavs and we took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat program the stealth f-35 strike fighter. it's 10 to 15 years newer than the f-22 and he goes on to say about how important the f-35 is and then saying the f-22 is clearly a capability we do need, a niche solution for one or two potential scenarios. specifically, the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. the f-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense any place else in the spectrum of conflict. maybe i ask my colleagues, would you ask yourselves why the f-22 has never flown over iraq or

afghanistan? it's been in production for nearly five years. it's never flown over iraq or afghanistan. and i want to emphasize, i think it's an important fighter. we are building 187 of them. the question before this body is whether we continue to build more. it's whether to build more or the f-35, the joint strike fighter which goes to the marine corps, the navy, and the air force is the weapon system that we need to balance our entire capability of manned aircraft. and i would ask my colleagues since the f-22 was on the drawing boards and moved into production, look at the advancement in unmanned aerial vehicles. i say that as an old pilot. unmanned aerial vehicles have been performing a magnificent job both in iraq and afghanistan. they have been a critical element sometimes on the battlefields.

and this president's budget understands that and gives extreme priority to that. so as we go on, in light of these factors, secretary gates goes on to say and with the support of the air force leadership, i concluded that 183, the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the fiscal year '09 supplemental was a sufficient number of f-22s and recommended it as such to the president. the reaction from parts of washington has been predictable for many of the reasons i described above. the most substantive criticism is completing the f-22 program means we are arriving the future of u.s. air supremacy to assess this risk, it is worth looking at real world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries have now or in the pipeline.

and the fact is that -- the fact is that in the view of the president of the united states, secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the chief of staff of the air force and most any objective observer of the military scene believe the f-22 is important. we need to have what we have, but it's now time to move on to the f-35, the joint strike fighter. so this amendment, this amendment, really means are we going to look at the real and compelling needs that we have to have in order to win the war in afghanistan to continue our success in iraq and put our funds into that kind of equipment and weapons systems or are we going to continue? and finally i just want to say i'm in great sympathy to the senator from georgia and other senators who have come to the

floor. i understand the sin seater of their views and i respect them. i'd also point out, though, to argue that we should build weapon systems in the name of jobs is not what we should be about. what we should be about is procuring and building the best weapon systems to ensure our national security and we can best equip the men and women who are in arm's way all around the world today. so i understand the economic impact particularly in these hard times. my sympathy goes out to the communities that are dependent on the contracts for the f-22 aircraft. all i can say to them is that we will do everything we can to help you and your families and make the adjustments. and there will be -- we continue to increase spending on defense and we hope that we will be able

to provide you with the necessary jobs and manufacturing that would be devoted to what we have ascertained as our national defense weapons systems procurement priorities. so i say with sympathy to my colleagues who are teem concerned about the loss of jobs in these difficult economic times, but this is not the way to provide jobs. our obligation is to defend this nation. so, madam president, i think this amendment is overdue. i think it will be a significant -- a very significant amendment, as i said before, whether we will get our priorities straight and listen to our esteemed secretary of defense, our president and our chairman of the joint chiefs of staffs and other military leaders in whose hands we entrust to make the tough decision. i understand the final decision is here in congress. but i also don't think we should

dismiss the arrangements that have been made by, i think, one of the finest men to have ever served this country and that's secretary of defense, mr. gates. madam president, i yield the floor. >> the senator from utah. >> who yields time to the senator? [inaudible] >> the senator from georgia. >> how much time do you need? >> 7 minutes. >> i'll be happy to yield 7 minutes from the senator from utah >> the senator from utah. >> madam president, i think a great deal of secretary gates myself. during his july 16th address the secretary of defense robert gates said the military needed maximum versatility to bring to bear in a wide range of armed conflicts. last july he argued that our

military must be prepared for a full spectrum of operations including the insurgent type of combat we're facing in iraq and afghanistan as well as large scale threats we face in places like north korea and iran, unquote. i cannot agree more with secretary gates. however, just as our nation unwisely sugar the hard lessons on counterinsurgency operations in vietnam, the defense department is poised to make decisions to defeat the air threat of today and tomorrow. the integrated defense system. the advanced system is composed of extended range russian surface air missiles such as the s-300 and the advanced fighter such as the su-30 which has been sold in large numbers to china and india. these systems make penetrating hostile air space extremely difficult if not deadly for aircraft lacking the f-22's advanced stealth technology for sustained supersonic speeds.

it is these capabilities that enable the raptor to have the unique capability to conduct stealth operations at any time of day or night. secretary gates argues for ceasing production of the f-22 after only 187 are built because we will not face what the pentagon refers to, quote, near-near anniversary end quote for the foreseeable future. for the sake of our intake i hope he's right but i believe this statement misses a critical point. advanced integrated air systems are inexpensive and inaffordable by nations such as iran with its insistence on developing nuclear weapons. history provides ample examples of the integrated air systems by nations that lack the resources to be considered a near peer adversary of the united states. as michael dunn recently noted north vietnam defended its territory during the vietnam war with what at the time was an advanced air defense system.

this system comprised of surface air missiles and fewer than 200 fighters was able to shoot down 2,448 american aircraft. the 1973 war between israel and egypt is another example. the egyptians learning from their recent defeats built an air umbrella under which its forces were able to initially make significant territorial gains while the air force faced serious losses. only when the egyptians advanced beyond the range of their surface to air missiles umbrella was the israeli air force able to find -- or inflict a significant blow. a more contemporary example is the loss in the 1990s was the nighthawk to the serbians who were not equipped with the latest air defense system. despite such examples, some argue additional f-22s are not necessary since stealth jet unmanned aerial vehicles or uavs which is still under development will play an increasingly vital

role in destroying critical ground targets. this is true for threats on the ground but i am unaware of any plans to operationally deploy a uav that can dog fight existing or next generation russian and chinese jet fighters which will be hunting these uavs. our forces could be confronted with the next generation russian and chinese fighters soon. there have been numerous media reports the russian government is developing a new aircraft presumably to counter the f-22. it's called factfa is being developed jointly with the indian government. media sources cite the development of the twin engine airplane with the j-12 and the joint tack fighter can tackle those threats and defeat this new generation of advanced aircraft. while the f-35 is a very capable stealth aircraft, it was designed to complement the f-22 not replace it. the fact is, the f-35 is neither

as capable a fighter nor a stealthy as the f-22. , for example, the f-35 does not have or can be upgraded to use the super cruise engines increasingly needed in today's stealth operations. remember, the f-22 is the nascar racer of this air dominance team. fast and unseen, the raptor will punch a hole in the enemy's defenses quickly dispatching any challenger in the air and striking at the most important ground targets. the joint strike fighter is the rugged suv. impressive but not as maneuverable or capable of sustained supersonic speeds the f-35 will exploit the hole open by the f-22 and have additional targets and attack our ground forces. this is not to say the f-35 is not a stealthy aircraft but it's role is to supplement the f-22 not substitute for it. only by utilizing the strengths of both aircraft do we ensure air dominance for the next 30s

years. if the f-22 is such a boondoggle why do our allies such as japan and australia want to spend billions to purchase the aircraft? why this australia plan to purchase 100 f-35s and large numbers and uavs and remain interested in the f-22? perhaps it's understands the russians and chinese are developing even more sophisticated surface air missile systems and stealth fighters threats the f-22 is uniquely designed and equipped to destroy. madam president others point out the f-22 has not been deployed in support of our operations in iraq and afghanistan. this is true. however, there were recent plans to deploy the f-22 to the persian gulf. but according to the july 9th, 2008, edition of the widely respected news, there were concerns about, quote, dislocation end quote. this means did f-22 is hardly a

dinosaur. it's a weapon that can change the balance of power in a region and deter our adversaries. madam president, in conclusion, i'm reminded of a point author michael corda made about the battle of britain. he observed that even though the two british prime ministers before winston churchill pursued a policy of appeasement, they also committed their government to develop and procure the three pieces of equipment, the spitfire fighter, hurricane fighter, and radar which were to ensure that nation's survival during the battle of britain. i hope the senate will profit from these lessons of history and vote against the mccain-levin amendment. and i want to compliment the leader from georgia for this endeavor. >> who yields time? senator from michigan. >> time remains on the opponents -- for the opponents?

>> 21 minutes. >> senator wyden, how much time? >> 10 would be plenty. >> will you yield up to 10 minutes for senator wyden. >> i rise to support the levin-mccain amendment. it seems to me that buying more f-22s at this point would meet the very definition of government waste. what you have is a situation where the pentagon, which suffice it to say the federal government has not been shy over the years for calling for additional weapons. they are on record as saying this is unnecessary. i've been out talking with members of the guard at home and trying to get their sense in what is needed in a dangerous time and they have never once mentioned something like this. they talked, for example, about

body armor and boots. when the congress is now having debate about trying to find additional money for healthcare, for example, to go out and spend close to $2 billion to buy 7 more f-22 fighters that the air force says it doesn't want i think just defies commonsense. my home state, for example, would love to be able to hire back police and other essential workers that have been laid off. instead of building seven planes, we could be restoring infrastructure in developing renewable energy. again, in my home state, we've had budget shortfalls. we've seen reductions in essential services, law enforcement just being one. the debate in my view isn't

about b-necessary steps in ensuring a strong national defense, the question is about whether united states congress wants to spend close to $2 billion to pay for more fighter jets that the air force doesn't want. i think it's also important to remember that the f-22 is not being purchased for wars that the united states is currently fighting. certainly, the taliban and iraqi insurgents do not have an air force. the f-22 is being purchased to fight in possible future conflicts with other countries that may have an air force. well, i strongly believe that the pentagon ought to be able to prepare for such possibilities. it is the pentagon who is telling us that we don't need these additional f-22s. i think it's also important to note that the pentagon has purchased 187 f-22s. so there's not a debate whether

the united states ought to have fighters in our arsenal. the debate is really whether or not the i was a needs 194 of them instead of 187. we have a very good secretary of defense, robert gates. and robert gates has said that 187 are sufficient to combat current and future threats. he's the one who said that more are not needed. he's the one who said, and i quote, we must break the old habit of layering layer upon layer of cost complexity and delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built and are then useable only in a narrow range of low probability scenarios. madam president, i think secretary gates has hit the nail just about as perfectly on the head as you can. he and our country want the strongest defense possible. but there are ways to make

better use of that $1.75 billion and on seven more f-22s. madam president, let me close by saying that i serve on the senate select committee on intelligence. i know that there are threats to our forces every single day. there is no question -- i see my friend from georgia who serves on the intelligence committee. he feels very strongly about this as well. we need to make sure that we are protecting our troops in arm's way. but we have a variety of choices. we have a variety of choices in order to secure the protection our troops have been in need of, and i intend to work with chairman levin, secretary gates, the distinguished senator from the senate that we replace the current f-22 with more capable

and safer fighters. last month, i visited with some of the 3,000 members the oregon national guard 41st brigade combat team as they trained for their current deployment to iraq. not one of the soldiers told me that their big concern was whether the air force would have 194 f-22s instead of 187 of them. they talked to me instead about the best vehicles. they talked to me about the best medical care if they're injured. they talked about the best body armor and not a-one of them mentioned the f-22. madam president, i am not voting against the f-22. i am voting for the soldier. i am voting for the taxpayer. they both deserve our government's greatest protection at this critical time in our history. i urge my colleagues to support the levin-mccain amendment. and madam president, with that i yield the floor. >> who yields time?

>> how much time is remaining on both sides? >> the senator from georgia has 11 minutes. the senator from michigan has 15 minutes. >> i'm not sure how many other senators -- >> the senator from michigan. >> madam president, i don't know how many other senators want to speak, whether or not the opponents have speakers on their sides left. >> the senator from georgia. >> senator inhofe had indicated a desire to come