and my great respect in regards to the previous speaker for his presentation. i caught the tail end of it. and in his own words god bless each of you. god bless our men and women who serve and have served our nation and may god continue to bless our wonderful country. thank y'all very much. [applause] cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> the house meets today at noon eastern time for pro forma session. legislative works start at 6:30 p.m. eastern time, when members meet to establish a quorum for the second session of the 111th congress. bill debate starts tomorrow. the second session in the senate begins wednesday, january 20t january 20th, with a judicial nomination, and legislation to increase the federal death limit. >> did you know that the number one free news app for your iphone or i phone touch is

c-span radio and c-span2, there's also a tab with links to all of our pod casts, including q & a and afterwards. it's all free and available from the apps store. >> live now at the u.s. chamber of commerce in washington, for remarks from chamber president, tom dononue. we'll be talking shortly about the state of business, heading in to 2010. here at the chamber of commerce live in washington on c-span2, from the associated press this morning, they're reporting the u.s. trade deficit jumped to the highest level in 10 months, as an improving u.s. economy pushed up demand for imports, exports rose as well. boosted by a weaker dollar. commerce department reporting today that the trade deficit jumped 9.7%, to $36.4 billion in november, a bigger imbalance than the $34.5 billion deficit economists had forecast. that from the associated press. again, we're waiting to hear from tom dononue, the head of

the u.s. chamber on the state of the u.s. business. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> i this is a u.s. chamber of commerce in washington. president tom dononue will be talking about the state of business heading into 2010. we'll hear his remarks shortly and also possible remarks by the chamber's foundation executive vice-president margaret spellings, former education secretary. today on this tuesday, the u.s. house returns getting underway with the second session of the 111th congress. no real business today. it will be a pro forma session at noon, when the house comes in. politico writing about the 2010

agenda says it's clear economic issues will dominate the start of this year's session and they now threaten to crowd out other domestic priorities, much as health care did last year. toss in a few fights about the transfer of prisoners to guantanamo bay prison and the congressional bandwidth is even further stressed. again, the u.s. house coming in today, live at noon on c-span, senate is back a week from tomorrow, january 20th here on c-span2.

[inaudible conversations] >> chamber of commerce president tom dononue speaking shortly on the state of u.s. business heading into 2010. we'll have his comments live when they get underway. want to let you know also live at 10:00 a.m. this morning, senate republicans just back from afghanistan, headed by mitch mccounselor, the minority leader. we'll be speaking to reporters, we'll have that live for you on c-span after "washington journal,als" the house and

senate begin the session, the house starting with the pro forma session at noon, but negotiations continue of off the floor on health care legislation. we get an update from a capitol hill reporter. >> i'm vice-president of the national chamber of commerce. if i could ask both at the back to come on in and take a seat and we'll get started this morning. this is a notable day at the u.s. chamber of commerce, and i'm thrilled to be a part of the chamber, and lead the national chamber foundation. that's the part of the chamber of commerce that identifies emerge business issues and helps develop sensible approaches to those issues so that we can foster economic prosperity and create jobs. and you're going to hear a lot more about that from our speakers today. the first thing i'd like to do is open by thanking our media partner, cq roll call group.

they got together last fall, recently merged this mighty partnership and we're thrilled that you all have joined us in sponsoring this event today. so not wanting to keep you from the reason that you're here, i will turn it over to our media sponsor, keith white, of cq roll call. it took me a minute to practice that. and thank you, keith, for joining us. [applause] >> thank you, margaret. as margaret mentioned, we are now the cq roll call group, we merged last august and it solidified our position as not only the largest news group in washington covering congress, but we're also owned by the economists group, which gives us a global perspective and of interest to a lot of the folks in this room. cq has been dog this for years, and last year, we sat at this podium and tom dononue facing a grim economy in an incoming

popular president, we had not supported, declared he would work with the administration, but vowed to fight the policy that he saw would smother the spirit of american enterprise, the power of the american dream. well, chamber was very successful in winning a number of their fights, but the president also had success. cq records that in the last six decades, no president had as much legislative success as obama, with over 97% legislative victories. but as margaret and i were speaking earlier, if you don't like the weather, just stick around and that's the way it is in politics. unemployment is now at 10%. yesterday, obama's approval rating had fallen to 46%, and the political discussion has shifted to how many seats the democrats will lose in the upcoming midterm elections. in this environment, we once again hear from tom done you'll as he outlines the business community's plan to looks at what will be the beginning of a fragile discovery, with a

quarter of the d.c.'s largest trade group, he serves as the president and c.e.o. of the chamber of commerce. he advocates for more than three million member businesses in washington and throughout the world. his accomplishments as the head of the chamber are man fold and his energy, discipline and organizational skills, he brings endeavors are such that i recommend that we listen carefully today, because whatever the outcome, his influence will surely be felt. ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great pleasure to introduce mr. tom donahoe. [applause] >> well, thank you very much, keith, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. and welcome to the chamber. i again would like to express our appreciation to keith's group, cq roll call, and to the national foundation and to others for helping to put this event together. keith, i was taken back for a minute, about the president's extraordinary track record, but

then i remembered that the important pieces of legislation aren't done yet. at the outset of this new year, there are some encouraging signs that the state of american business is improving. after almost two years in severe recession, the economy began growing again, in the third quarter of 2009, by 20.2%. -- by 2.2%. fourth quarter growth could be significantly higher. but we should not assume that that would signal a trend. overall, the chamber expects growth for 2010 in the range of 3%. yet, while there have been some improvements, we must add another word when describing the state of american business today, and that word is uncertainty. think for a moment about the nation's job creators.

the men and women who run our small and large businesses as well as those who lead our universities, our health care facilities, an many other institutions that employ our work force. if you were in their shoes today, would you jump quickly into new investments and hiring? or would you wait for some clarity and some common sense to take hold first? most of these job creators would like nothing more than to keep their workers employed. to create new jobs and bring some hope and relief to families struggling without a paycheck. but when you look at what's going on in washington, in the states, and around the world, somewhat do they see? they see massive tax increases on the horizon, not just the expiration of the tax cutsed hus

of bills of dollars in new taxes. they see health care legislation that contains a burdensome mandate on employers and virtually no meaningful reforms to improve quality and cost control. they see a climate change bill and a potential epa regulations that could significantly raise energy prices and impose new layers of bureaucracy on their organizations. they see financial services legislation, moving forward that could choke off their access to capital, at a time when lending is already very tight. america's job creators also see a renewed push by union leaders to pass card check, and many other measures to control the workplace. they see a trial bar working

with their allies in congress, and with many state attorneys general, to expand opportunities for new litigation. they see the rise of trade isolationism at home, and abroad, that could threaten their export markets, and now renewed fears about terrorism. and our job creators see the federal government planning to expand the national debt by at least $9 trillion over the next decade. more debt than has been piled up in all the previous years since george washington. they see many states going broke as well. what will the impact be on their companies, and their employees? these are the uncertainties that job creators are wrestling with. uncertainties that call into question how quick or strong our

economic recovery will be. and no one is paying is higher price than the american worker. over 7 million americans have lost their job since the recession began. 10% of the work force is unemployed. a number that saw us beyond 17%, when you add those who have stopped looking for a job, and the millions and millions of part-time workers who want to work full time. our nation faces many big challenges. but no priority is more important than putting americans back to work. and so the chamber is calling upon leaders in government, business, labor, and across society, to unite around the ambitious goal of creating 20 million jobs, new jobs, over the next 10 years.

with 20 million jobs, we can reemploy the unemployed, and meet the needs of our young people and growing population who are coming into the work force. the first -- we first articulated this goal last october. when we made it the centerpiece of our new campaign to support the american free enterprise system. we did so in part because we were troubled that policymakers in washington seem to be focused on everything else, but the creation of jobs at that time. today, almost everyone is talking about jobs and that's a great start. but talk won't create the jobs we need and over the long term, neither can the government. in his economic speech last month, president obama said, and i quote, job creation will ultimately depend on the real

job creators' businesses across america. we hear you, mr. president. and we agree. so let's talk frankly and specifically about the policies that we must have to accelerate growth and put our citizens back to work. first, we can create jobs by doubling u.s. exports in five years, and five years again. this is an ambitious, yet achievable goal. but to get there, we need a bold and aggressive trade policy, something that we don't have today. the rest of the world is not waiting around for the united states to act. countries are busy making their own arrangements. with each other and leaving us in the dust, we all know about the political pressure against trade coming from some of our unions.

but there is no excuse for america to take a back seat to global leadership and trade. washington is sitting on pending trade agreements with south korea, colombia and panama. if we fail to pass them, we will not only miss opportunities to create new jobs, we will lose a large number of existing jobs. south korea, for example, is ready to proceed with a free trade agreement they have negotiated with the e.u. if the europeans go ahead and we believe they would, about mid year, while we continue to delay, and a very legitimate study, estimated that 350,000 more americans will lose their jobs. with millions of americans already desperate for work, how could any member of congress or the administration sit by and allow this to happen. we must also modernize our

export controls, which today caused us billions in lost high tech sales. increasing these sales, allows us to create great manufacturing jobs here in the united states. we need to fix the buy american rules, which have delays, stimulus projects, and new hiring for months and months. while also risking trade retaliation against our workers, and our businesses. we must seize the potential of small and medium sized businesses, to export. they already account, by the way, for 30% of our total exports. we can bring thousands of smaller firms into the international marketplace, if we assist them. with expertise, trade promotion, and financing. we must also vigorously protect

our intellectual property. the theft of i.p. costs our nation hundreds of thousands of jobs every year, and threatens consumer safety and puts our leadership in innovation at risk. at its recent white house job summit, president obama said, and i quote, if we just increase our share of exports to asia by 1%, that's about a quarter of a million jobs. if we increase it by 5, that's a million jobs. that fills a big hole. and it doesn't cost us money. but right on, mr. president, the business community is ready to work with you, and with congress to expand our exports around the world. our second point is that we can create jobs by rebuilding america's infrastructure. our economic platform is running out of capacity, and it is

dangerously declining in quality, and safety. to me, our infrastructure needs, we need to boost public investments while working to ensure that the money is spent wisely in areas of genuine need. reauthorization of the nation's core highway bill is essential now. but it is the private sector that can be the main driver of new innovator projects in transportation, power generation, and transmission. water systems and communications. one study estimates that there's $180 billion in private capital already available to build infrastructure projects. put this money to work, in conjunction with public dollars, and it could support more than 1.5 million jobs over 10 years. to unleash this capital, governments must clear away

regulatory impediments, and legal uncertainties, and provide incentives that public agencies include private sector participation in their efforts. you know, it takes too long to build anything substantial in this country. and everybody knows that. the federal highway administration found that it takes 13 years for major projects to go from initiation to completion. the chamber is prepared to work with governments at every level, to attack these barriers, and remove them. we can then put americans back to work, with private infrastructure investments, that add long-term value to our economy, and boost our global competitiveness. now, third, we can create jobs with major investments and break-throughs in energy. one of the great rallying cries

of our day is let's create green jobs. while we share in the excitement, and have supported alternative energy projects at every opportunity for years, we must balance our enthusiasm with some realities. we urge policymakers to do the same. the united states has the talent and the capacity to invent the green technologies here at home. but if we don't address the excessive costs in our business environment, and brace an aggressive trade policy or protect our intellectual property, the businesses, the jobs, and the technology will go somewhere else. we should also produce more american energy on our land and off our shores. including oil and gas and clean coal, which would improve energy security, create jobs here at home, and keep our economy

competitive. one of the most powerful ideas, which we should jump on immediately, is a rapid expansion of clean, safe, nuclear energy. and i believe, by the way, there is a growing sentiment in this city and in this country to do so. nuclear power is a solution that doesn't have to be invented. we can use it now, and make it a vital part of our climate change solution, because it doesn't admit green house -- emit green house gases. license applications have been submitted for 26 new reactors. if all of them were built, they could support about 240,000 direct and indirect jobs, and as time goes on, we'll need to build many more of them. but whether other countries take -- whereas other countries take two or three years to license a new reactor and less

than four years to build it, a new reactor here takes five years to license, another five years to build and that's before the environmental suits start. we must address these delays, as well as the legal uncertainties and the financial risks that stand in their way. nuclear energy is not the only promising energy source facing such hurdles. the chamber has identified more than 380 specific projects across the country, more than one-third of them, wind, solar and other renewable energy projects that have been delayed or even killed by the not in my backyard theory. it's time to end the unnecessary barriers. they cost jobs, threaten our energy diversity security, and leadership. the fourth part of our plan, is that we can create jobs by

expanding credit across this country. we urgently need to find ways to ensure that business, especially small business, can get the credit they need to invest and create jobs. robust sba lending programs, a strong export-import bank, which by the way, carries no net cost to the taxpayers, and an openness to foreign capital are all important, but the real question is how to fix and revitalize our capital markets. we must close regulatory gaps and take additional steps to protect investors and consumers. but we must not overregulate our markets and our companies, limit consumer choice, or attempt to drive all risk taking out of the system. businesses get the capital they need in very diverse ways. this is especially true for

smaller companies. they use every possible source, from lines of credit on their homes, personal credit cards, asset backed lenders, and loans from family and friends. we must preserve of these credit options. that's why the focus on reform efforts on capitol hill should not be on limiting the choices available, but rather, on making sure they are sold responsibly by registered firms. unfortunately, the financial regulatory reform bill passed by the house moves us in many ways in the wrong direction. we are hopeful that the current discussions among the key senate players will produce a better bill that can be conferenced with the house. it seems like everyone in washington is meeting with the bankers these days. first, the bankers were told to build up more capital. then they were told to hurry up and lend it.

then they faced the prospect of having their loans and financial products second guessed by regulators. lawyers, judges, state attorneys general, and congress. and today, they learned that their transactions will probably be taxed. this is precisely why it's important to establish clear certain rules with strong oversights and then get the government and the politicians out of the business of micromanaging banks and other financial companies. strong capital markets and financial services provide the fuel that willpower economic growth and jobs. congress and the regulators must get this right. our fifth point to create jobs is that we must ease the uncertainty over tax increases as well as health and environmental, labor, legal and

fiscal policies. congress, the administration, and the states must recognize that our weak economy simply cannot sustain all of these new taxes, regulations, and mandates now under consideration. it is a sure fire recipe for a double dip recession or worse. now let me say a word about taxes. instead, of this situation i outline, lawmakers should enact tax incentives, for example, preserve the reduced tax rates on capital gains and dividend income, shorten depreciation and extend section 179 expensing. adopt a permanent fix on the death tax, and address the a.t.m. tax for both businesses and individuals. now, i understand the arguments here.

but you can't have it both ways. if you want to tax, you'll have a very difficult time convincing people to create jobs. responsible pension reform is urgently needed. it could quickly free up billions of dollars for payroll without jeopardizing companies' retirement plan. congress and the white house should also seriously consider maintaining all federal income tax rates at their current levels for the foreseeable future. now, i know this flies in the face of some strongly held views. but taking this bold step would reduce uncertainty. it would boost investment, and jobs by leaving hundreds of billions of dollars in the productive economy. it would help small businesses and their employees succeed, since many of them pay their

taxes as individuals. now, the impact on the deficit is clearly a worthy consideration. but remember, we're not talking about cutting income taxes below what they are today. we're talking about deferring a massive tax increase in a very weak economy. a tax increase whose clearly intended purpose is not to reduce the deficit, but to pay for more spending. if we go ahead with these tax hikes, we will likely end up with even bigger deficits and greater economistry. -- economic misery. let me make one final point about tax increases. in the coming weeks, we expect to see numerous proposals for small business tax relief, and we'll probably support them all. but we must also remind americans that larger companies create lots of american jobs.

larger companies sustain countless small companies, who are their suppliers and who provide services, to their employees. and larger companies have the greatest ability and pressure on them to move their operations elsewhere, if america does not remain competitive. when that happens, small companies get hurt. thus, it makes no sense, no sense at all, to rob peter to pay paul. by offering one shot tax cuts to small firms, while imposing massive tax increases on larger ones. we need companies of all sizes to succeed. congress and the administration also need to find a more rational and affordable way to address our health care and climate change. the chamber supports a health care reform program and has for

many years. we have offered many positive ideas to the congress, the administration, and the american people. unfortunately, the legislation emerging from the house and the senate is not reform. it's not reform when you undermine the private employer based system, while doing nothing to reign in costs. it's a prescription for fiscal insolvency, and eventual government takeover of the american health care system. now, the chamber also supports strong climate change policy, both domestic, legislation, and a global agreement. but the bill passed by the house last year, would tie economic activity in knots and eliminate jobs from one end of the country to another. that's why a growing number of democrats in the senate are running from this approach, just as fast and as far as they can.

and they share the concerns voiced by the chamber, and many others regarding the potential economic impact of the e.p.a.'s endangerment finding. america's job creators also have to worry about whether they're going to face new union organizing rules. such as card check. and a provision to have federal appointed arbitrators force the first contract on newly unionized companies, as well as 90 other regulations being considered by the labor department, which all have the potential of upping the cost of small and large companies alike. now, we fought these ill conceived policies successfully last year, and we'll put -- pull out all the stops to do it again. the seemingly endless expansion of litigation also is a problem. it gives employers great pause

as well. the chamber's institute for legal reform will continue its comprehensive program to stop lawsuit abuse. while our in-house law firm, the national chamber litigation center, will vigorously defend employees' interests in court. ladies and gentlemen, that's the chamber's job plan. yet we must also ensure that america has well-trained workers to fill these jobs. that's why we need a number of things. first, a comprehensive immigration reform plan that offers flexibility for guest workers. we must also recognize that no economy and no society in the 21st century can succeed over the long run if it allows 30% of its young people to drop out of high school. the fundamental failure tears away at the fabric of the

american dream. and our nation's promise of equal opportunity. now, we've been working with school reform leaders across the nation, with the obama administration, and others, to promote major reforms in k-12 education. we're pushing states to develop rigorous standards on basic subjects, and we're strongly supporting the administration's effort to emphasize math and science at all levels in the race to the top program. so let me conclude with a few comments about how we plan to drive our agenda forward. first, i believe this country is ready and eager to rally around the cause of creating jobs, and putting americans back to work. i'm confident we will find a hot of common ground with the administration, with the congress, and the states on this priority effort.

we also understand that nothing grabs the attention of our politicians more than an upcoming election. last year, we generated one million citizen contacts to capitol hill on key legislative issues and we're just getting warmed up. this year, we plan to organize and carry out the largest, most aggressive voter education and issue advocacy effort in our 100 year history. make it clear you understand, we never get involved in presidential politics, period. we haven't, we won't. but as america chooses a new house, the chamber will highlight lawmakers and candidates who support pro job agendas, and hold accountable those that don't. we also continue to make job creation the substantive

centerpiece of our positive campaign in support of free enterprise. of after only three months officially in operation, our campaign is already enlisted 300,000 free enterprise supporters, americans from all walks of life, who believe that our economic freedoms are worth fighting for. who believe that free enterprise with all of its faults and occasional excesses is the only system that can create 20 million jobs and lead us back to prosperity. we're going to significantly expand the campaign, throughout this year and beyond. we aim to create a new dynamic in this country. so that every time a lawmaker is prepared to take a position, or to cast a vote, he or she first stops and considers. is this going to strengthen free

enterprise and create jobs, or will it undermine economic freedom and destroy jobs? some see americans free enterprise system as the last great idea. an idea that has failed in its mission. an idea that is simply not up to the challenge of -- challenges of our time. how wrong they are. free enterprise is the next great idea. of all the innovations america has bestowed upon the world, free enterprise is the greatest innovation of all. it renews and reinvents itself every day. it is never old, and it's never tired, it is always young and it is always vibrant. that's because its strength and its goodness rest on the enduring principles of individual liberty, personal

responsibility, and the basic human right of every person to be and do his or her very best. and when that happens, society is well served. thank you very much. thank you for coming. and have a good day. [applause] >> this morning, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell and other republicans hold a news conference on their delegation to afghanistan and pakistan, where they met with leaders of those nations, plus american and british military commanders. we'll is have live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern on our companion network, c-span. later, emergency responders from around the country come together for a news conference on relocating the broadcast spectrum on public safety.

live coverage at 5:00 p.m. also on c-span. >> did you know that the number one free news app for your iphone or ipod touch is c-span radio. now you can get quick and easy access to three streaming audio channels, c-span radio and c-span2. there's also a tab with links to all our pod& a and of afterwardd it's all free and available from the apps store. >> now available, c-span's book, abraham lincoln, great american historians on our 16t 16th president. a great read for any history buff. it's a unique, contemporary perspective on lincoln, from lincoln's early years to his life in the white house, and his relevance today. abraham lincoln, in hard cover at your favorite book seller and now in digital audio to listen to any time, available whereio e sold. learn more at c-span.org/lincoln

book. >> now, a discussion on the leadership of al qaeda and possible successors to osama bin laden. from the carnegie endowment for international peace, this is just under an hour and 15 >> jerod is the author of global

jihaddism, and with the first director of research at the combating terrorism center at west point. brian was also presently at west point, also director of research at the combating terrorism center and recently started at the new america foundation, so we're very excited to have him much closer. so jerod, please begin. >> thank you everybody. i know fargo, north dakota, is a hotbed of counterterrorism research, and analysis. we're actually trying to make it such. it's my hometown and it's good to be in a heat wave. it was about 45 below a few -- how is the mic level? does that work? ok. so you know, i've been -- i've been musing about abuah for a long time and we've been talking about who he is, what he represents and at first i started ringing his bell i guess around 2006, i mean, it was an

interesting story, we'll get into it when he escaped fro from bagram in 2005. he wasn't coming out until 2006, on al qaeda's official media outlet, so i think people thought he was a curiosity, a novelty, he was one of the four who, you know, spoke more in some of the debut videos. but by 2006, it became clear to me that this guy was different, fundamentally, i thought, than the rest of the al qaeda boys, who were the talking heads. and you know, so i started saying, oh, he's a pundit, he's a -- he's a warrior, he's a scholar, he's an artist, whatever, and i got a little criticism at first, saying, well, a, he's not as important. what are your metrics. you as an intellectual, the saying, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

as an intellectual, i see intellectuals, or bud being intellectuals in these guys, and so, you know, i had to think for some time about whether or not this guy lived up to the hype that i was giving him, and then other people challenged me, saying am i actually amplifying him. you know, by appraising him -- by praising him as much as i was, so it's a constant struggle with face in our community, trying to assess these guys' importance without giving them exactly the credibility that they need, and in fact, that's what happened with abul, as proof that he was still the most important thinker within al qaeda, which is, it's weird, so there's a lot of post modern twists and turns to al qaeda's media strategy. so i'm going to try to talk a little bit about that. in september of 2008, there is a video knee touring a guy who is using the name sheikh atalla, it

turns out this is not sheikh atalla, but what got my attention, you see this logo in the lower right hand corner, do you see something else in this video? this is a still from a video. there's a coffee mug on the guy's desk, and it's got the media logo on it it. and i thought, well, this is really, really strange. why would al qaeda's official media organization emblazen their logo on coffee mugs and feature it prominently on the desk of one of their leaders. well, shortly there half, you sauve libya giving a talk, again with the microphone, with the logo, so what you see here are two things. one is that al qaeda has adopted their media organization's logo as their official logo. and two, i think they imagine themselves like a new al-jazeera, in that formality, and i think al-libya was the

face of this organization. and it turned into a global media organization that uses terror, while the recent events suggest that al qaeda is back in the terrorism business as well, so i think that pendulum swings back and forth, but i think there is a fundamental transition, say around 2005, when you have al qaeda's senior command being totally marginalized in afghanistan, because you have the rise of abu musab al-zarqawi in iraq, and he's getting all the media attention. zawahiri and his friends have to figure out how to make themselves more relevant and in 2005, al libya escapes from our base, he and three our buddies, these guys, had this -- it is a great escape. and they actually detail it, you know, minute by minute, in a two-part video series and they transcribed it and published the transcript in english and arabic, and you know, this is the stuff movies are made of. these guys are hiding in you

know, bales of wheat and they knock on people's doors and some people, you know, are against them, some people are for them and they're traversing at night, and helicopters and planes flying over, so it's this wildest cape plan, but -- wild escape plan, but they made it out, they hooked up with taliban folks and got passed back to al qaeda. so this was the first time that the world had heard of al-libya, but he has a long history of being involved in jihaddist activities. one of the things i thought was most interesting, well, first, he's a libyan. date of birth is people say he's somewhere in his late 30's to mid 40's. we don't have a date of birth down that i've seen, that i believe. he was a pretty thoughtful student in college, he was very interested in science, engineering, his mind, you know, he really enjoyed studying categories and trying to assess how things fit together.

so you can see, he's -- he enjoys puzzles, it seems. and he eventually got to afghanistan, joined up with the libyan islamic fighting group, was sent to moratamia to get formal religious training. this is something that people debate in my field, because al qaeda has never been clear to the extent of his formal religious training and so of course, everybody and their dog in al qaeda goes by the label of sheikh. i think he's got the most religious credentials of most of the talking heads that we've seen, and so in fact, this is -- he's kind of become the juris prudential police chief for al qaeda. i think mike sawyer call him their pit bull or something to that effect, so he's the one who keeps al qaeda in line. and he does this from a religious, you know, jurist prudential standpoint and he came out second to zawahiri,

against sharif. the prominent previous jihaddist who denounced al qaeda. so you know, by 2005, we come to understand who this al-libbi is, things to al qaeda media, but again, like i said, he wasn't featured prominently in al qaeda's big media organization, it was coming out on this peripheral organization, so one of the things you see here is the making arguably of al-libbi, the branding of him. you have to roll out this new line, so starting in late 2005, you have a series of videos where you show al-libbi fires klishnakovs, so he's a fighter, he's a romantic, they start publishing some of his previous

poetries and you see this is a comprehensive man, not just a guy sent out there to, you know, to go kill. he was on the sha rhea council form the libyan islamic fighting group. he is a thoughtful and smart and religious guy, as they're painting him. you see him sitting here with a guy who is flanking him to his right side, almost in every video from 2005 forward, named abdul ashami, this is a guy i thought of, but he's right next to al-libbi. one of his bagram escapees. they had been grooming him to be the next al-libbi and he's served as the lap dog for him, right there at his side. so you start to see him on these various poses and he's instructing tactical training, which i don't think he has any ability to instruct, but everything comes to a head in

november-december of 2005, when he releases a letter to abu musab al-zarqawi. now, if you know, there's three letters that were written from al qaeda's senior command to zarqawi. one was from sawarhi, and it was a desperate plea for money, information, news. they said brother, we know you're doing great things in iraq, you're also killing a whole lot of people, could you stop that and by the way, i've written a number of books, this is what zawahiri was saying, and we feel irrelevant and could you send us a couple hundred thousand dollars, because we're broke. well, that had no impact. zarqawi kept going. november, a direct letter is published online, 26 pages or something, and this is dear sheikh, you're the best in the world, but there's a few things that i need to remind you of,

and he gives a lecture to zarqawi. first, the jihaddist movement has been embattled, whenever it commits crimes of excess, you kill too many people, you bet too loud, too ambitious, you overextend, he doesn't say -- he doesn't come out and say this is what you're doing, but you know, he implies it pretty heavily. second, he sales the jihaddist movement is always strongest when it consults with one another and this was one of zawahiri's complaints. he said be careful who you surround yourself with, to zarqawi. you need good advisers and this is a trend or a theme that we see running throughout his writings and acts, that he surrounds himself with similarly thoughtful people and bounces ideas. he tries to be as transparent in his thinking process as possible. third, he says communication is key. you need to explain to the people, what it is you're doing, why you're doing it, how you're doing it and it is really rooted in an approach premiered by the godfather of global jihaddism,

and four, he talks about the importance of strategy, and doing things sequentially, and again, you see the certain order, there's the right path that one needs to traverse. and so, you know, this letter in concert with the third letter that was sent from the sheikh, who i believe to be another libyan, who seems to be a partner in crime with abu yahya al-libi, so within months of him escaping, being a no name guy in the open source world to lecturing the greatest jihaddist on earth, the one who is actually up to something, about how to go about his job, which is a fascinating position for al-yahya inserting himself in. and he is sitting on the floor, he's humble, they introduce him

as sheikh al-libi and what do you see behind him, a laptop and a rifle and this is important. everything that al qaeda does in their videos, i think is critically symbolically important so what they're reminding you is that in 2000, al-libi was a web master for the taliban. in 2000, i think i was still trying to figure out how to use e-mails. he was making websites, uploading news, content, keeping stories, going through the taliban's web site, so he's an innovator thinking, he's useful, chris machrismatic. they're branding him. bin laden 2.0 and i think this is an important step. well, as you move through 2006-2007, you start to see just what this guy is capable of, and his role that he plays for al qaeda. so i think some of the most important positions or things, contributions that he's provided to al qaeda, is he served as,

you can call him the religious map maker for al qaeda, you know, he's a jihaddist topographyer. he's saying that movements historically have gone awry, because they've gotten off the right path. i'm going to articulate what that path looks like and then i'm going to make sure that everyone stays on that path and i'm going to scold you if you're off that path. he's been very aggressive against saudi mainstream sheikhs, so you can call him the religious policeman and he's obsessed with purity, religious purity, and we'll talk about this, but his argument is that islam is being diluted from within, by the embracing of non-islamic concepts, nationalism, using the word resistance instead of jihad. any time that you embrace a concept that's not islamic, what he says is you're introducing trojan horses into islam, that will allow the west the rand

corporation specifically he says, to come in and take over islam from within. mainstream, you know, moderate islam. it's just a fabrication. democracy is nothing more than a ruse to take over islam. insurgency being staged by the west, so he expense hopes of his time trying to point out any times there's insurgencies, i guess you could say. the irony of this is he's embraced the same approach, and he spent a ho a lot of his writ, identifying religious concepts and trying to gut them of meaning, replace them with his own meaning and then remake islam from the inside out in his own image, arguably. so i think those are some important roles. another one is, you know, you could call him the global jihaddist movement, cheerleader in chief. he makes sure he hits every major field of jihad, somali,

cheat knee i can't, nigeria. he goes anywhere where he feels that al qaeda is under attack or he wants to point more attention to. he'll write a thoughtful treatise about it. and i think he serves as al qaeda's investigative reporter. he's always the first on the scene when it comes to intellectual issues. and whole talk more about that when i get into some of his writings. about how much time? a few more minutes. ok. you know, just let me show you a little bit more imagery from some of the early videos here. there's on a raid, so he has to get his operational credentials checked, i mean, it was silly. he did nothing and then he gave a sermon at the end praising, you know, the three afghan soldiers that they killed, and said they're cheap on fire, great operation. this was fascinating here. this is a -- a photo shoot, that al qaeda released, or the media released of teaching in a

classroom session. the photo is put out for a specific reason. here he's showing he's relaxed, he's the man of the people, he gets along well with the troops, he eats, he's the kind of general that will come down and walk through the camp and you know, be with his soldiers. and i think that's very heartening for a lot of people, who are logging on, you know, on the internet and they want to be one of these guys sitting around, you know, eating with the great abu-yihi. i think what is most interesting is that for those of you who know abu lce al-libbi is. he attended the teach-in, but they didn't show that the great, you know, general of al qaeda, al-libbi had attended. they let you think that he may

have been the guy, but they don't confirm it. this is something that gets replayed in the recent video that was released, where you have abu yahya at the end. and then you see this image. intentionally blurred, and who are you left to think this might be? would osama bin laden actually attend abu yahya's feed? who knows. they don't confirm or deny it. they just trickle it out there and let you believe it. so there's i guess this consistency to his videos, where somebody, be it him or his handlers, are trying to make you think that very important people take him seriously, you should too. : today and the nature of the

wars they are waging against us have fundamentally changed. therefore, everything i just wrote about that limits our ability and constrains our ability to kill muslims is irrelevant. he wipes the slate clean in terms of islamic limitations. and he's in a position to rewrite it. i think his ego despite this humility that he projects is massive.

recently, all of his statements have been compiled and put out here in the forums. and this guy i can't tell you how popular he is on the al-qaeda forums. and one of the reasons and i'll stop on this is that not only does he approach criticism by rejecting the premise, but sometimes he'll actually up the ante. and so, for instance,, you know, al-qaeda came under a lot of attack for killing muslims in algeria saying they are killing innocent muslim. -- musliming. they were in the wrong place that they were allied with the crusaders but we're going to kill more of them and, in fact, you should too. and if you're not killing muslims, or, you know, they are you're not doing your job. he's not tiptoeing around and he triples it.

the movement just loves him 'cause he's tough, he's macho.wz he's -- this guy has got every box checked from al-qaeda's perspective. i will maybe stop there and maybe i'll let chris ask me why he gave us six strategies for how to defeat al-qaeda so we can get into that. >> great, thanks. >> first off, i just want to thank chris and carnegie and jarret for having me up here. it's fun to be up here with jarret. we worked together for a long time and it's good to be able to comment. i'll take my shots with him. in general i think -- in general i think that that jarret is spot on. that attiyatullah is a unique leader in al-qaeda and jarret explained why mostly because he's been positioned both as a

religious leader, as a cheerleader but also as an on the ground commander and that's all been done in the media. and what makes him abu yahya is al-qaeda has changed. we talked about the who will be the next bin laden. al-qaeda has changed fundamentally since bin laden became its leader. and so the next bin laden really may not have that much in common with bin laden. what bin laden the in the forefront that he was. and most important is circumstance that he was there in this very unique time period with the anti-soviet of this jihadi with a relationship which gave him tremendous entree but really in that period he had connections in saudi arabia and he had finances that enabled him to sort of separate himself from

others and provide the backbone for a wide variety of organizations where he was a touchstone and could be a touchstone for groups that were operating all over the place even if they were operating independently. he was still somebody that had access to resources that they did not have. and i think, though, when you look at al-qaeda today, it's operating very differently. and this is where i'll quickly with jarret a little. he talked about al-qaeda be a media organization and potentially swinging back towards being a terrorist organization. but i really think when you look at the way al-qaeda is organized today, the al-qaeda centralññt we think about in afghanistan and pakistan serves as a media organization and as a consulting organization. it's mckenzie plus time warner and where the military aspects organization comes in is with the affiliated groups with al-qaeda and yemen orkgñ al-qae and wishing and less so in algeria, i think. but also in particular with the

universe of pakistani-based -- what we call taliban groups. and these are the organizations that i think are particularly worrisome today. we see that with what seems like this very sophisticated intelligence operation with others. we see it with the musab groups on the barcelona subway.gs we see it with a lot of the other organizations. even here in the united states where these guys were connected not at least what we know thus far directly to al-qaeda and osama bin laden but to these other groups that sit around al-qaeda but have their own bases. that's where the -- that's where the muscle is coming from. as we move forward. and so the qualities that we're going to see, i think, in the next sort of supreme figure in al-qaeda, if there is going to be a single supreme figure, it's going to be someone that has a

couple of -- a couple of qualities. one, they need to be telegenic and they need to be smart. they need to be able to defend the movement writ large from attacks on it. and i'm glad jarret mentioned that because this is critical. and it separates somebody like abu yahya from the people who really lack credibility that those who recently came out al-qaeda never kills muslims on 80 people ar killed in a market in peshawar. this is a very big distinction. and you're exactly right, jarret. al-qaeda is at its most dangerous when it defends whatever it does. whether it's killing people that it shouldn't be killing. whether it's killing muslims. it's most dangerous when it stands its ground.wr and we need to keep that in mind because the audience for their activities is not the west

primarily. we have to make -- we have to understand it's the same thing with the attack in detroit. some folks said it was a failed attack because the plane didn't go down. but that's from a western perspective. from the perspective of the primary audience, i think, which is muslims that al-qaeda is attempting to recruit and attempting to reach out to, they show determination, continued capability to come close and a reason to keep fighting. and when we think about it that way, these sorts of things are successful and and i think abu yahya communicates really well and the way he's very powerful, one he's often quoted about the affiliate organizations. he's clearly seen as very important to, you know, aqim, quotes him quite a bit. they quoted him in somalia, al-shabaab. he's clearly influential in those groups and because of his

background and his presence in the media which is much more closely associated with the taliban than al-qaeda, he's got very good ties in with a variety of taliban groups. and that is important at a time when taliban groups and there's -- you know, afghan taliban and pakistani taliban doesn't even come close to describing the complexity of this milieu. but abu yahya is well positioned to communicate with those organizations and the variety of those groups and lead them intellectually and this is where al-qaeda projects power especially in pakistan. and we have to understand that's how al-qaeda is going to project power is intellectually by leading existing organizations down the road to do the kinds of activities that it wants them to do. and abu yahya is well positioned to do that. i would say, however, and i'll just -- i'll throw some sand into the mix so we can have some

debate, which is that abu yahya doesn't stand on his own. and you still see, i think, that al-zahari has a more prominent role in the organization and is still the most important second to osama bin laden. zawahiri released a long book criticizing the pakistani constitution which we can talk about. but in it he thanks them for their support. that's nice of him because there's rumors that zawahiri and abu yahya had conflicts in the past but it demonstrates when push comes to shove, zawahiri is still closer to the center of the circle than somebody like abu yahya and abu yahya still revolves in an advisory role. and i'll is to be there. >> i think this is great. i've wanted to do an event to

highlight this for a long time and i can't think anyone who has come out to talk about to jarret who is writing a book about abu yahya. i think this whole notion of how he's been rolled out and how he's been presented and framed, i think wearing the camouflage jacket -- i thought that was fascinating in addition to the engineering bit which we talked before. before we get in the questions i hope you can do the six easy steps real quick. >> real quick i want to respond to two things that popped up when brian was talking. i thought brian's comments were awesome. so i think one of the biggest differentiations between al-qaeda's high command represented by al-shahiri and abu yahya al-libi is that he admits mistakes. when al-qaeda stands its ground and i think when they're honest in standing their ground -- what you were saying about when he comes out and it sounds like

propaganda and zawahiri -- we've been accused of killing innocent muslims. we don't kill muslims and if we did, oops, they shouldn't have been there and god will sort it out. when abu yahya al-libi comes out he said i screwed up and these guys are in heaven.;-[ the movement called me on it. i was wrong. you guys were wrong. thanks for keeping me straight and i think for the global movement -- and that's where i move into my second point is that they love abu yahya al-libi. they respect and revere abu zawahiri. i think you're right. he totally serves in an advisory capacity to al-qaeda's senior leadership. i don't think he's calling the shots right now. and maybe, you know, that's -- it's better to call him the next bin laden lest the next zawahiri. maybe that's the next abu yahya

al-libi was saying. what abu yahya al-libi did that blew my mind. i can't believe this guy would have done this. he's in the course of an interview in september, the 9/11 anniversary interview in 2007. and his interviewer, al-qaeda interviewer, says, you know, if the americans were going to defeat al-qaeda ideologically, they are going to degrade our movement and, you know, wage a successful war of ideas, how would they go about doing it? abu yahya says there's six easy steps and the interviewer says but are you sure you want to reveal these strategies to the united states. what if they used them against us. look, the americans are already using these in an ad hoc kind of fashion. they fund certain things in egypt and they support things and this and that. but they haven't put it all together yet. and i'm going to put it all together and i'll demonstrate

i'm the best counterterrorism expert the west ever had by sticking their thumb in their eye. they haven't come up with this strategy yet but i'm going to inoculate the global movement and by identifying them i'll make sure they can't hurt us in the future because we're all aware of them and so from then forward one time like there's another one. this is why i was saying he's the investigative, you know, reporter for al-qaeda. the six steps. amplifying backtrackers. this is something -- anybody who used to be a big voice in al-qaeda, the global jihadist movement that then renounces al-qaeda hurts them. he says it hurts them. it hurts them really bad. i call it my barking dogs metric. however many barking dogs are yapping in response to something is an indicator of how vulnerable they feel. the sharif recantations -- or revisions, zawahiri wrote a book about it in response. did two videos about it. abu yahya did a book and

others -- all these guys responded to it he says this hurts and it does. second, fabrication and exaggeration. anytime the west can either make up lies, he says, or just exaggerate that which al-qaeda has already done to make it look bad really hurts them. the best quote i can think of is the quote that says when your adversary is busy shooting himself in the foot don't stop him. this is, i think, the mantra that al-qaeda understands is the case and thank god they would say america stopped them from shooting themselves in the foot. based on our ---ion -- you know anything. fatwa against al-qaeda, it doesn't damage. i think the most prominent guy whose hurt them from the mainstream community would be ca-dari. this guy carries more weight than anybody else. and, you know, but they're careful with him, too. i haven't said many head-on attacks of him.

>> i think they know he's dangerous. >> an insurgency is fundamentally predicated on eliminating distinctions between you and the host population you're trying to blend into, right. and al-qaeda understands the more distinctions that are introduced in islam the worst it is for al-qaeda. they want to eliminate these distinctions and allow themselves to look like pious muslims. five, anytime when we issue this ksm photo of him with the hair and, you know, we make him look khalid sheikh mohammed we make him look terrible. this is useful for us and you can degrade jihadist leaders and then promoting these distinctions. in my book i talk about abani salavez, this drives them through the roof. they don't to deal with that. you know, there's only one

salfism and the fact that he would announce them it was a blunder and it was out of egge and he was trying to be really cute and it was a great strategy and like he said we're kind of doing and we're not putting it all the pieces together and we should put it in a systemic approach. >> i think this goes to underscore why it's so amazing that abu yahya is the terrorist nobody knows about or the leader nobody is talking about which i think is kind of fascinating. he's laid out a whole plan for what you would think someone would be doing and isn't doing. with that i'd like to turn it over to questions and discussion. i'd like to remind everyone if you could just please introduce yourself and wait for the microphone to come to you. but also to leave it to a question, not a big long comment. and who would like to start? leeann.

in the front right here. >> hi, leeann kennedy with dali rand corporation and i would like to ask you jarret and maybe brian, too, if you would elaborate on the implications of the generational change in al-qaeda. if we look at abu yahya al-libi as an example of generational change within al-qaeda, what that means for al-qaeda's relationships with other groups, specifically with the taliban. if we look at mullah omar perhaps as an older generation and the musuud clan as an older generation. what's the collaboration between the two of them. secondarily if i might, what do you think, jarret, what abu yahya will do if anything to respond to his brother's recantation with the group. thank you.

>> thank you. i'm a japanese journalist. i have a question about relationship between zawahiri abu yahya al-libi and i'm talking about his regional followers from egypt. are they doing good or are they frustrated with the new potential leader? >> hamid from ums quantico. -- umc quantico. i have two questions for mr. brachman and one for mr. fishman. i'm not here to start any politics. but to some speculation in the middle east maybe there's no longer any historical leader in al-qaeda such as zawahiri and bin laden.

do you think you are trying to put a human face on the global-tier organization to keep public alert. >> good question. >> the second question, please, regardless politics differences between shia and sunni and the four sunni schools, how would you categorize muslims in general? i mean, how many groups of muslims to help people in the u.s. or in the western to understand who are those muslims to not mix between muslims and radicals? and for mr. fishman, you just said that al-qaeda leadership -- they get to their positions according to their skills. they are smart.

they work hard -- if you compare it with middle eastern so-called secular regime, they look like they are much better because those secular regimes -- they use nepotism. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> gentlemen? >> okay. so i'm just going to pick and choose a few things. leeann, hi. generational shift, i think totally. i guess i don't have anything brilliant to say about the relationship with other groups. i think brian is probably a lot better at that than i am. as we talked a lot about just his resonance on the forums versus -- i think it's qual-tate actively different than the old guard resonates. so i don't have anything profound to say about that. i agree i think that's a very

important point that i didn't emphasize enough. on his brother, many people don't realize this -- and it's shocking and appalling to me and i was going to bring this up and i didn't have time. so the senior leadership of the libyan islamic fighting group is -- has been detained imprisoned for some time in libya and there's been a recent effort to get these guys out to renounce their previous activities and they've written a book, four or five leaders. one of these is these older brother. you have a guy who's poised to be the next bin laden trying to run al-qaeda and then you have his older brother who's renouncing everything he had ever stood for when it comes to violent jihad, right? and this is not a story. it's a story, you know, that we're trying -- that we've been talking about for a while. i mean, think about it, there'sgals -- angles, the older

brother wagging his brother and we don't the relationship and the al-qaeda and the libyan fighting group and so until we can understand and build that foundation we can't possibly appreciate the gravity of this situation and so thanks for reminding about that. on the relationship between zawahiri and abu yahya, brian, maybe you can remind me. i think maybe it was "newsweek" that put out something that said there was tensions between libya -- the libyans and the egyptians. >> it was may, 2006, early 2007, i think it was a "newsweek" story. >> and then like two months later isn't that when abu yahya al-libi was joining al-qaeda. so al-qaeda has this habit of kind of like kum-ba-ya videos whenever they are under attack or somebody accuses of them not getting along well with somebody and they come out and hug and play patty cake and this is what happened with this video. so whatever it is, the public face is at their unified command.

on the question about the human face, i don't work for the u.s. government. and, you know, if that's an unintended consequence of me identifying him as such, that's not -- it's not my goal. i think you're right to point out as brian has that the global jihadist movement is incredibly complex and multilayered. and so it is always easier to fight an enemy who has a face and, in fact, al-qaeda realized this. they built their entire anti-pakistan rhetoric on musharraf and they made hating pakistan -- they equated that with hating musharraf. i don't think that's what i'm -- what i'm doing. i think you're right. that it could be construed as a reductionist, you know, argument. i hope that the quality of my scholarship would help people see the granularity and sophistication within this movement. >> i just want to applaud.

i think that's a really good question about whether or not we put a too human of a face on a movement that's composed of people with a wide variety of motivations in all corners of the globe. and with, you know -- one thing that's interesting about al-qaeda is that it's increasingly, i think, trying to be more ideologically together. there's a split on doctornarians and pull everybody together and a group called al-suri who's in prison now.

the strat jays were looking to create wider, broader coalitions of people among among folks who didn't agree on every ideological and particularly religious points. that movement, i think, is failing in al-qaeda almost completely. and in part because of the influence of zarqawi but in part because indoctrination has become really critical as this movement spreads out all over the place you don't have the same kind of sort of brotherhood in arms that is gained when people are standing shoulder to shoulder trying to kill soviets together. and so you don't have as many personal relationships and if you're going to build a movement that is cohesive, it needs to have a more distinct ideology. zarqawi said we will be strangers and this is from a line in the koran. it says islam is a stranger and it will be a stranger again but the strangers ultimately will prevail.

and what he was saying was the we are ideologically separated from the bulk of society we know that we're actually doing the right thing because of the approbation we receive and al-qaeda as a rule has started to pick up some of those ideas and abu yahya does that as well. the one thing jarret didn't mentioned in abu yahya that i want to talk about because it get to some of the things that leeann was asking about in terms of generational changes is that abu yahya has been at the cutting edge of the campaign to discredit the pakistani regime. and i think that is fundamental to where al-qaeda's senior leadership is going to today. it is -- you know, most of you probably read bruce hoffman's op-ed in the "post" yesterday. if you didn't, you should. it was very good. two things that bruce didn't mention is al-qaeda is doubling down on trying to delegitimatize and discredit the pakistani

regime, one, and secondly, they are increasing their efforts to co-op the public opinion surrounding the israeli-palestinian conflict and that's creating all sorts of problems for them but also opportunities. >> thank you. let's get some more questions. in the back, please. and there's a microphone coming. >> my name is yousef and i'm a scholar and i'm writing a book about the libyan -- as my friend stated there is no relation between all these groups. this relation started in the assassination of azam. all the differences is just a joke. as my friend mentioned, he's

born january 1st, 1963, and this is confirmed. as they are going to fighting this phenomenon and libya fighting this in the green mountain all the areas fighting in the regime and i state this in an interview in a magazine, 1996, they created this monster and they -- they turn and eat them who create them. as a matter of fact -- >> sir, if we could just get to the question because i know there are many people would like to ask -- >> who making a new bin laden,

who making a bin laden and who making a new bin laden. thank you. >> yes, please. please raise your hand. okay. >> hi, i'm holly and i'm an intern for the middle east institute. my question is, well, from my intake on your presentation, i think al-qaeda is actually becoming divided and abu yahya is not the new bin laden but an opponent to him in zawahiri. what's your intake on that and is that a possibility? >> i'm jackie northam with npr. i wonder if you could help me. is your charting the development of abu yahya as he goes in the relationship with al-zawahiri and are you garnering any information where bin laden is. this forum is called the next bin laden. what does that actually mean? do you have any idea if he's on his way out or if he's already

gone or where he sits in the whole, you know, calculation of what al-qaeda is doing right now again as you chart the growth of abu yahya. >> thanks, jarret, would you like to start? >> the question of who made bin laden is one -- i'll leave that to smarter people who have written longer books about that. who's making the next bin laden i think is a beautifully phrased rhetorical question that maybe we can all debate that that. hopefully i'm not but i don't know. in terms of is he an opposition to bin laden and zawahiri? yeah, change hurts a little bit. and we've talked about issues kind of related to it. i don't have anything profound on any of these questions so, brian, you'll have to come through and finally in terms of

the relationship between bin laden and abu yahya. i don't think bin laden has mentioned abu yahya. he did in his recent statements gave a reading list. i don't think abu yahya -- it was mostly -- was he? so he may have been on bin laden's recent reading list. i'd have to go back to the transcript to see that. but in terms of -- i call him the next bin laden because it's cute, not because i have any like -- i mean, i believe it. i think symbolically he will take the place of the senior -- you know, the anointed one, the grand pooba of it. but there's little information about the sources of that that relationship. >> the rumor back in the "newsweek" story years ago was that -- was that zawahiri was jealous because he perceived a relationship between l wishing bi and bin laden which he wasn't a part of which is at least plausible.

i don't want to stand here that it's necessarily true but it's plausible in the sense zawahiri had a manipulative perception or attitude towards bin laden. one thing that i would say, though, is that i think that on the most important strategic maneuvers that the senior leadership is doing right now, one, which i mentioned is the turn against the pakistani government and the real decision since 2007 tocph highlight thatd prioritize it and also to prioritize palestine in their propaganda in a way they hadn't done in the past. everybody is on the same page. abu yahya was on the cutting edge and zawahiri released a book that was a takedown of the entire pakistani constitution which is interesting noting because jarret is exactly right that it used to be that al-qaeda's line was, hey, you hate musharraf which you hate

pakistan fundamentally which in line where the other militant groups is the fundamental basis of pakistan was that it was founded on an islamic basis but that the rulers had differentiated from that. al-qaeda is now at the leading edge in saying, no, no that's false. fundamentally what pakistan is, is an infidel state -- it's not even an apostate. this is a disreputable state that needs to be attacked. it's not about changing leadership. and i think zawahiri and abu yahya and bin laden are all on the same page on that. >> john of the foreign services institute. the question -- can you talk more about ways that abu yahya is trying to enforce some purity?

you talked about that. but without a lot of the examples and i'm curious about that 'cause that seems to me in line with a couple of things you need in the q & a, both of you, that enforcing that sort of purity is itself potentially divisive. so how is he doing that? what's the response been but i assume given the disparities in the movement that it would create ruptures and fractures as much as unifying it on a ideological basis and what do you know about that. thank you. >> jessica matthews, carnegie endowment. you may have already ducked this question, i'm not sure. [laughter] >> is there a central -- who gets to control a decision to roll out a new major figure as you gibed? -- described. who controls access to the websites? is there a central intelligence somewhere that says, okay, we need a second group of people in

case the first rank gets killed or whatever? and if so, who are they? >> scott shane with the "new york times." this is sort of related. could you say something about the relationship between al-qaeda central as it's sometimes called and these various regional affiliates such as aqap and whether there's any tension in local goals versus this vague sort of global jihad? and also is there any significance, do you think, for al-qaeda in the fairly dramatic decline in the popularity -- its popularity of its tactics in most muslim countries including pakistan? >> who would like to start? >> yeah, i'll take a couple of these. i'm going to defer to brian on some of them.qj in terms of how he enforces religious purity, i mean, there's nothing -- it's mostly

through expose journalism. i mean, he brings up the same ideological lines. he just points a lot more aggressively at people and mocks them and, you know, hangs them out to dry much more so than i think other al-qaeda guys had done. for instance, he takes on sheik omar who had written a book. and what he does he takes him point by point and so it's just -- it's a lot of fun to read when abu yahya takes somebody to task. i mean, he doesn't pull punches and he does it systematically. so it's not he's coming up with anything -- i think the most -- the most fascinating attempt, though, to enforce this religious purity is when he's taking islamic consents or when he's dealing with the issues, like the use of -- you know, the use of nationalism or atheism or resistance as being western concepts. what's interesting there had been a push a couple of years

ago instead of calling these guys jihadists, to call them these arabic terms, abu yahya actually uses these terms that we -- people in the united states were promoting to call al-qaeda against the united states.ví. he calls us, you know, bridging or thugs. orwell said without words you have nothing. i think abu yahya has really embraced that. in terms of who controls access to the media, i think that's a brilliant question. that's something we don't have a lot of knowledge on. ksm and his combatant status tribunal said that he was the external media opps director under al-zawahiri so it seems to me zawahiri probably founded it, runs it and is the guy who[@f s at the head of the table in terms of identifying who, when,

where to release and so we see it not just withmb(rvp but you saw the number three, i guess, that was a very strategic rollout that went over a few months. thematically you can see -- they push them on one front and the next video they push them on another. you saw the same thing with abdullah sayeed. is that his name? yeah, we just found out who was killed. there's a new guy no one is paying attention who i think al-qaeda has positioned to be one of their top three sheiks, al-sham wishing. he started releasing audiotapes and in december he released his first videotape and we know what he looks like and it made no news you. al-qaeda, with the form of media, the themes that are addressed in that media and the timing of that media, i think it's all choreographed and i think it's zawahiri who oversee it is.

i think they have a media council of people and these are people you'll never hear of or ever see and to scott's question, if i knew the answer to some of those, i'd get a lot more quotes in your newspaper. from an open source perspective, man, that's really hard. >> yeah, i think -- that is a really good question about who controls the media. but i think it's important to'3 recognize here and one thing that jarret said was that when abu yahya in particular was rolled out he was rolled out on the media. he was doing it independently which likely was through networks -- i would imagine through networks that were more closely associated with the taliban than he knew from his previous stint with him. i don't think you want to call it an end-run but he was developing a power base separately from said and then he sort of adopted him. interestingly it was about a

year and a half ago where the media organization that abu yahya started out with was folded officially into and they announced that and so you do see even with these media organizations them coming together and sort of integrating and oftentimes that can be a leading indicator of use of the media, i think, tends to be a leading indicator for relationships between different organizations. it was a leading indicator with aqim before they joined al-qaeda and it was fatah al-islam in lebanon although it never joined al-qaeda at one point just before it was routed by the lebanese army started using the distribution network which suggested to me that they were becoming more closely aligned and had closer ties and networks with al-qaeda central. that says something about the relationship between al-qaeda central and the various affiliates. i think much of it has to do with the media and you do see public instruction of strategy. some of it quite specific.

bin laden released a statement called practical steps for the liberation of palestine in which he described a movement from iraq not into the levant but he said, no, the way to get to palestine is via jordan. and at the same time, he started reaching out more aggressively zarqawi's mentor. though, i think he's kind of -- yeah, he's in jordan and he's sort of a strange figure. he's in and out of prison. you know, he gets let out of application sometimes he says something nasty -- he would say something nasty about zarqawi and go back in approximate prison and come back out again. he would get attacked quite a bit for this sort of thing but i think so you do see this public kind of messaging. but there is private messaging as well.

and it's hard to know exactly how that occurs today. we do know something about that from the iraq time period because of the capture of the zawahiri document it off zarqawi, which was sent through a variety of messengers and it seems like it may have been a hard copy of something, a thumb drive or something like that. but, you know, that's more difficult. i think it's probably harder to get from pakistan to yemen than it was to get from pakistan to iraq. and so i would imagine that the internet plays an even more important role. one of the things that you saw there was that -- and this will become more difficult. it also gets to the generational question was that people would identify themselves -- in identifying himself to zarqawi so that he would know it was credible he said i still remember that object you gave me in herat. he would refer to something because they had a shared history together in order to

sort of gain credibility. that kind of thing is going to be more difficult going into the future for al-qaeda because you don't have the same sort of cohesive moment that there was during the anti-soviet jihad or that period in peshawar in the 1990s. >> please. >> thank you, i'm alan with c & l resources in the middle east institute. my question is for jarret. what are the vulnerabilities of abu yahya both internally within al-qaeda and more importantly as we're here in washington as a strategist as a counterterrorism strategist? >> viola from bloomberg news.

you talked about who controls the media but before someone is rolled out or either rolls themselves out, using your terminology, there needs to be a strategic decision made if it is plotted as it seems to be. so i guess i want to take it one step further and that is who is making that strategic decision or what is -- what is the likely answer to that? and what are the implications of his rise in the organization for how al-qaeda operates and then further for how the u.s. needs to respond? for the u.s. response? >> one more question. yes, in the middle in the back.

>> hello, katlin duke from "time." this is a little bit of a change in topics. you mentioned yemen. i'm wondering is the u.s. contributing to raising the status by targeting him and john brennan mentions on cnn he's a bad guy. does that boost his standing? thank you. >> thanks. >> okay. i'll try to go quick. so vulnerabilities, a brilliant question. i'd like to write an article about this. i'd have to think about it in depth first. i think the most glaring vulnerability is that he's shown himself as the living embodiment of ideological purity and consistency. and so i think it only takes one misstep. the problem is that he's very quick to acknowledge when he takes, you know, the wrong steps. so he's already trying to reempty our ability to do that.

but i think anytime anybody builds themselves up on, you know, purity, that's the best way to attack them. brian, chris, you might have some different ideas. i think ego may be in there, too. he's got to have a massive ego based on how much he just talks. he just fills the airwaves up with his voice. well, anyways. so the question is, who's making the strategic decisions about whether to roll out? i think it's an interplay. i think you've got -- you've got back room guys who you don't know about within al-qaeda. these are names -- al-qaeda has kind of a think tank that no one is really focused on. i would encourage somebody out there unless i can get to it first is this magazine of the van guards of corazon. this is where most of the guys have been rolled out had been writing articles in this magazine for two years, three years prior to getting rolled out officially this they

test-fire them. it's their test bed -- they test-fire some themes out. you also saw the same thing -- sometimes they will test a test-fire and bin laden will draw in and zawahiri will pitch in six months later. i think there's this constant interplay between them. the global forums they -- this is why al-zawahiri dental open town hall forum or q & a to respond to the questions and criticisms on the forums because they do value the global movements opinion because that's their primary constituency. but in terms of how that mechanism works, i wish i knew. they just don't expose that side of them. implications for his rise for al-qaeda, i mean, i think he's -- i think he's done his damage. so, you know, the next question is, you know, what happens if he dies?

so i think he's already raised the movement up to a level of ideologic ideological sophistication that wouldn't have been there without him and all these things that i've already talked about. it's now on everybody's radar. he's made his contribution. so the longer he lasts the more damage he can do but it was reported a few months ago -- maybe last month that he had been killed. unfortunately, i had mixed reactions when i heard that because, you know, that's a short book. but, you know, i do think he's one of the most dangerous terrorists out there because of his mind. and in terms of al-loki. i think the fact he's already bad. i think he was a religious advisor to al-qaeda in the peninsula. he was a fire-breathing sheik after he left the u.s. for a while and that's bad enough. but i think he was actually

doing bad stuff. so i think targeting was probably necessary. >> chris can answer questions about yemen and al-loki far better than i can. in bruce's op-ed yesterday when he talks about strategy and i agree with. it's death by 1,000 cuts. it's knots dependent on necessarily a large attack 9/11 style. i think that's accurate. he says three five pieces one to create background noise, economic warfare, to divide the anti-al-qaeda alliance, to actively exploit failed states and to earn western recruits. and this -- these five are interesting because again it allows us to ask, you know, who can do those things well? and if effectiveness really breeds leadership, then who else besides abu yahya is potentially a success? i mean, i don't think jarret would say abu yahya is the guy 100%.

there are other folks out there and i think we should ask these questions because one of the things that made bin laden, bin laden was that he -- he was effective. he got stuff done. the embassy bombing in 1998 and the american response to it with missiles raised bin laden's status and allowed omar to have more operations and it's true. and the answer to your question is our attention being paid attention to al-loki raising his stature, yes i would say it is. and we should be careful because -- you know, there's lots of fun ways we could go about trying to undermine somebody like al-loki because he has lots of things he's written in the past that has been criticized, you know, he's been -- he was declared -- >> arrested for prostitution charges. >> yeah. there's lots of things that we could be talking about with al-loki and frankly from a communication's standpoint, you

know, it would be great for us as a nation to be talking about to undermine this guy. but we have a problem when somebody like this comes up that we always seem to elevate them, right? what we need to do is look at these people as human beings because it's their humanness that's their weakness and that's how we exploit them and how we get them. they are not 10 feet tall, none of them. >> thank you very much. i think this has been a great session. and in sitting and listening to this, this really reminds me of -- especially all the names i don't recognize, it reminds me the importance for why we need to study these things and it's shocking to me that eight, nine years into this protracted conflict there is still not an organized format, an organized-funded way to study this and i think it's shocking. if you look back during the cold war there's a whole science of criminology and russian and soviet studies and chinese and maoism and communism and it's

amazing there's not a more coherently organized and funded and structured program to understand this conflict that we find ourselves in now. so please join me in thanking our speakers. i'm really looking forward to the book. thank you. [applause] >> today acknowledge governor jon corzine delivers the annual state of the state address. we'll bring you live coverage from the state capital in trenton at 2:30 eastern on our companion network c-span. later, emergency first responders from around the country come together for a news conference on relocating the

broadcast spectrum for public safety. live coverage at 5:00 pm eastern also on c-span. >> did you know that the number one free news app for your iphone or ipod touch is c-span radio. now you can get quick and easy access to three streaming audio channels. c-span radio, plus c-span and c-span2. there's also a tab with links ta and "after words" and it's all free and available from the apps store. >> now a senate hearing on high speed rail. the federal railroad administration and amtrak are among the witnesses plus federal regulators and high speed rail advocates. held by a senate transportation subcommittee, this is just under an hour and 50 minutes.

[inaudible conversation] >> often at events which are meant to be full, they just invite members of the audience to come up and make it look like there's a big crowd up here. [laughter] sfwlsh sfwl >> i don't want your egos to be upset. there's a lot going on today. and part of it, obviously, is what happened with the metro rail system. it's actually depressing, senator warner, sad that there is no current way for the ntsb

or the department of transportation or anybody else that can make recommendations but they have no enforcement authority. i did not know that. until this happened. and people can have a variety of philosophies about the federal government. but it seems to me that where you have a heavy train being hit by -- and something went wrong and yes, we'll speculate and it will all come out in the end and in the meantime the only thing that really counts is the -- you know, all those families of the dead and sometimes the families of the injured suffer longer, but there's no authority to tell them they got to run a safe train.

they are recommendations but no authority. the chairman has arrived. >> hello. sorry the train was a little late getting here. thank you, mr. chairman. among chairmen here, he's the chairman. thank you all for being here and my apologies for a couple minutes off target. what we'll try to do to expedite things is to -- we'll limit opening statements to the three of us. make them short and we'll ask the other members who may come to include their opening statement and their record. we're going to work in 5-minute cycles. so i will start by once again thanking you all for being here.

the roles you play are very important. and we're pleased to have a chance to talk to you. this hearing comes to order. and we gather here at a rather sad moment. many lives were lost with the crash of the metro. there are numbers still to be computed of those not only perished but those who were wounded. what it tell us -- as we see the confusion that's followed and the effort that's followed is how important the use of the metro, a transit system, is.

and for the last few years, amtrak, because we're talking about intracity but we can't ignore the contribution that transit rail makes. the last few years we've seen amtrak break ridership records year after year. in 2008 amtrak's ridership hit more than 28 million riders marking the sixth straight year of gains. these gains proved two important points. it establishes the fact that people are sick and tired of waiting in traffic, standing in line at the airport, inhaling dangerous emissions and just waiting indefinitely for their travel mechanism to be there. if we provide convenient and reliable rail service, americans will choose it.

secondly, these gains prove that time cries out -- this time cries out for a major investment in high speed rail. we need demand for faster and more efficient rail service. for years, we've had flight -- flights -- the fight, i'm sorry, beg and claw for funding for passenger rail for those who wanted to bankrupt amtrak even when more americans were demanding increased amtrak service. and this track we have here in quick fashion describes some of the hurdles we face. ...

>> we need to invest more in rail. last year we took a major step forward with my landmark law to prepare for the next generation ahead of the traveling demand that is obviously building. the law provides $13 million over five years to repair and update amtrak's infrastructure and grow service into towns and cities that are ready for passenger rail. we also created new grant programs for high-speed rail investment. it has been a long road, but this new law finally paves the way for solid and ongoing

federal commitments to passenger rail. fortunately we have a strong partners in the white house in president obama, vice president biden, and with the help of the secretary lahood they know that to keep our commuters mobile, to keep our nation competitive we cannot simply rely on cars and planes to get people from place to place. we need a balanced transportation system. high-speed rail is part of that balance equation, and that is why the recovery law we passed in february contains more than $8 billion for high-speed and intercity passenger rail. this money will not only improve rail service, it will creates jobs. in this tough economy these transportation investments are smart investments. they put people to work, reduce delays, and congestion and cut carbon emissions and our dependence on foreign oil. president obama and his administration has presented a

great vision for high-speed rail network here in america. i am committed to working with the president to turn that vision into reality, and i look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how we can make that happen. i turn first to the ranking member on the subcommittee, and then we will hear from a chairman rockefeller and ranking member hutchinson. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for calling this very timely hearing. we have a very distinguished panel today. i want to welcome as well as we look forward to hearing from all of you. my state is one of the few in the country that does not have passenger rail. you have to hearken back a long ways in the annals of history to a time when we did. i recall my father who is now almost 90 talking about taking back in the '30's the railroad

from my hometown from myrtle to mitchell which is about 1 30-140 miles. that was a fairly frequent bank. people travel by rail a lot. it has been sometimes as we have had that south dakota. we are very independent. i can probably approach this issue may be more dispassionately than most since it is not something that we have in our state. of a commodity with all the stimulus money we could get some. that would be nice. i want to say that it is an opportunity, obviously. the funding has been made available for high-speed rail in the president's budget, not on the stimulus money, but also the other 5 billion that is in the next annual appropriation cycles. i also would argue that it poses some risks to be degradable chanted for advancing high-speed corridor development, but it is also a great financial risk. not wisely carried out. this is the key area that i am

most interested in hearing about from today's witnesses. hands the government generally does the course job. one common result is the money gets spread thinly over a wide range of projects. as a result none of them actually gets done correctly or quickly. or the government uses soft criteria that results in choosing and viable or unsustainable projects. we also often find that costs by a lot of control. cost estimates were unrealistically low. specifically what i would like to hear our panel discuss today is what how will these be chosen, what criteria will be used? how will it what overside will

occur, and how will it be carried out to ensure the projects come in on budget and on time? i hope congress will closely monitor how this is implemented. when we look back five years from now i hope we will see great progress in advancing high-speed rail in our country. to me, success means rail passenger trains that serve real public transportation needs that have been constructed on budget and on schedule that are filled with passengers making the rounds economically viable. i want to thank our panelists for appearing today and for sharing their testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. the chairman of the committee, senator rockefeller. i want to make him a general. [laughter] >> thank you, chairman lautenberg. first of all, i want to

apologize. i am not on the judiciary committee. the white house is very anxious to have all senators meet with the judge sotomayor before recess. i have been assigned a time at 3:15. that is, kind of, for life for her if she wins, which i think she will. so i have to excuse myself. i do that without any misgivings because this is frank lautenberg's passion and has been for years, really more than anybody. so i also welcome all of you, including governor rendell. i have never seen him in person. he's always on television. it is kind of exciting to meet somebody like that. [laughter]

>> mr. chairman, you don't know how exciting it is. i work with him. >> now, i agree totally with senator lautenberg on the excitement of high-speed passenger rail, i spent 10-12 years either chairing or being ranking on the aviation subcommittee, this body. it's just occurs to me we are down now to a relatively few airlines with lots of problems. if you just look at the pattern of people's behavior, they want to use fast rail. they want to use rail. they want to use fast rail. so that is what this is about. you know, i look at west virginia. people thought necessarily assume that there is a lot of

passenger rail through west virginia. it is actually a huge factor this. in fact, our amtrak service, which senator lautenberg helped so much, has increased -- has doubled in one of its lines in the last year, doubled, and the other has risen by 19%. west virginia has done travel endlessly. so this is a very important statement. earlier this year senator lautenberg and i joined, as he indicated, with the vice president and $1.3 billion allocation to the stimulus package. the speeches were not very interesting. the money is real. that's what counts. i have to say in a non-partisan

fashion that it is really thrilling to have, as senator lautenberg pointed out, somebody in the white house really wants this and cares about it, who does not like that level of grain up there and wants to increase the grain. i want to make a special point today to say that i believe that passenger rail can do so much for us as a country. that is not just a cliche. we need to increase the use of passenger rails enormously, not just for passengers, but for freight. and we need to do it as fast as we possibly can. it affects our climate change. it affects one-third of our greenhouse emissions in this country. the department of energy's national laboratories says the

innercity passenger rail is 17% more efficient than air travel. it is 21% more efficient than auto travel. that says something. so encouraging greater use of it is terribly important. i vow to do everything i can, senator lautenberg, to work with you to make sure that we can do this. and we will. it is inevitable. it is part of america's destiny. i thank the chair, and i apologize to the audience and to the witnesses. >> thanks very much, senator rockefeller. your position as chairman of this committee is one that gives us encouragement that we can achieve this goal of ours of having a more important rail leg to our transportation system. we thank you very much for your encouragement. senator hutchison. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am very pleased to be at this

hearing and also to have the opportunity to have a texas presence at the hearing because you and i, mr. chairman, have worked for a long time on amtrak. i would say that we have had a very productive partnership in keeping the national part of amtrak also viable. i think that is essential. now that we are beginning to a see the possibilities for high-speed rail i think that it becomes even more important to have the national part of the system also have the opportunity for high-speed rail to connect into amtrak and therefore provide really better synergism and ridership and service to both amtrak and the high-speed rail that i do think will help ease the traffic congestion in many parts of our country. i was very pleased you mentioned

the amtrak reauthorization bill last year. the first amtrak authorization bill before this last one was in 1997, and i sponsored that one as chairman of the surface transportation subcommittee. i think we did some great reforms in last year's to begin the process of having a federal partnership for capital grant programs for states to be able to invest in rail. and i think that is an important step forward to making it more viable because any successful rail project is going to have to have multiple partners. it is going to have private sector, federal, state because it is so expensive. the early investment is expensive, but then it becomes much more efficient after it is finally built and established.

but i am pleased to welcome mr. sabo who we'll here for the first time in your new position as fra administrator. we will play a major part in this. i am glad you're going to have several regional meetings to determine what the parameters for high-speed rail should be. i think having them all over the country is another good sign. i just a just want to say that robert eccles is a former county judge. he is now heading up the effort for a high-speed rail corridor called the texas t-bone. it is a great plan that is coming forward. i think it could go right into amtrak. it could have a lot of great results. i hope that it is one of the first projects that can get some of the stimulus funding that

would be available. and i think it is great that he is here to talk about the national system, and i just want to recognize governor rendell who also is someone with whom i have worked long time. his brother is actually my constituent in dallas, robert, and also a good friend and someone with whom i have worked also in dallas and in texas. so we have a lot of interests here, and i look forward to hearing from the witnesses. and it is a very distinguished panel. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. we made a decision that because of the size and the quality of the witnesses here today that we would forgo additional opening statements. we will all try to deal with this expeditiously and have just five-minutes rounds or ds or six-minute rounds, maybe just an extra minute there.

i would like to introduce the witness panel. a good friend of governor rendell of pennsylvania. just like the people of new jersey are neighbors of pennsylvania and rely on trains on a daily basis the governor rendell has been a bigger advocate for passenger rail, and i recall clearly his satisfaction, but his energy in getting a new rail link between philadelphia and harrisburg. it met with almost immediate success, and that is the kind of story we expects to see constantly. the honorable joseph sabo, the fra administrator, this is the first time you have been before this committee since your confirmation. we are looking forward to hearing how you are working to develop first-class rail passenger service. and there your head and heart are behind that.

and the honorable judge robert eckles, chairman of the texas high-speed rail and transportation corporation. director of physical infrastructure and choose at the government accountability office. and commissioner of the national surface transportation policy on revenue commission, present ceo. we thank you all for being here. governor rendell, if you would please take five minutes to summarize. try to meet the target if you can. >> mr. chairman, you forgot mr. boardman. >> oh, my god. i looked at joe. we will fire that person. [laughter] you know, that is what happens. take advantage of relationships. i know. we are glad to have you.

joe, you have done a great job at amtrak. i am proud of you. i thank you, governor, for the reminder. we will start you off with a fresh five minutes. >> mr. chairman and ranking member, all the members of the committee, it is a pleasure to be here. i think this is a momentous opportunity for the country. the opportunity we had when we build the federal highway system. we need to do it right. i come here today wearing three hats, as governor of pennsylvania, as chairman of the national governors' association, and as co-chairman of building america's future, an organization dedicated to improving and investing in america's infrastructure that i started with governor schwarzenegger and mayor bloomberg. we believe that permiting inner-city rail is a key priority for america's overall infrastructure plan. mr. chairman, you talk about the success pennsylvania has had. teamed up with amtrak we have

invested $145 million improved the time on that philadelphia-harrisburg line from 120 minutes to 90 minutes. in two short years our ridership has gone from 898,000 to nearly 1.2 million. if we build it right people will ride it. i have absolutely no doubt about that. we have seen similar progress of around the country. a lot of emphasis on doing what we did. the harrisburg line has been improved to 110 miles per hour. i will talk about that in a second. i believe as we look at in a city passenger rail we cannot be content as a nation to build about 110 miles systems. if we do that we are absolutely consigning ourselves to second-class citizenship. as you know, the trains in

shanghai run at 268 m.p.h. the french tgv is that 160 miles per hour. we cannot be content to build out to an ordinary system. now, what will high-speed rail to for us in addition to moving passengers and helping our climate control? it will create jobs for our citizens, jobs in building up the system and orders for american factories. let me stress the importance of that. in pennsylvania alone we have general electric transportation. most of these factories tend to be in hard-hit areas of the country. they employ over 4,000 people. they are ready to build the next generation of high-speed locomotives. in a little town across from harrisburg the biggest steel corporation in the world has a plant that builds railroad tracks. it has 400 workers. with just this $13 million investment they intend to

increase, maybe double or triple the size of their workforce in doing such. tgv, the french rail system is run by a company called sncf, the national rail company. they employ over 200,000 people in good paying jobs. let me remind you france is a country one-fifth of the size of the u.s. so just imagine the number of jobs that would be, permanent jobs in building this high-speed rail system, as well as all of the construction jobs and orders from the factories in building out the system itself. but if we are going to do this we have to do it right, and we have to do that scale. 13 billion, and i know what the senator said. he is right. in one sense $13 billion is a lot of money. in another sense it is a small amount of money. to build high-speed rail up the california coast is estimated to be a $45 billion cost factor. to build a high-speed train from philadelphia to pittsburgh, which would link the

mid-atlantic corridor to the midwest would cost between 20 and $25 billion alone. a couple of weeks ago vice president biden had a meeting with six governors. it was a very interesting meeting. the governors are pushing for their own projects, 100-mile project. the midwest governors said they had a plan to link the midwestern cities up at 100, 110 miles per hour. governor kain said that there is a plan to link richmond and washington with 110 miles an hour. we can't make this effort building 100-mile an hour train systems. or else we are truly consigning ourselves to be a second-class nation when it comes to transporting our citizens. we have to look at the bullet trains. we have to look at improving. if we did the work we need on

acela and amtrak we could go from new york to washington in one hour 30 minutes. we could confine or shuttle. by doing that we would improve east-west air traffic all over the eastern seaboard. we should not be flying people 500 miles or less. we should be putting them on a high-speed trains. ranking member thune asked a very good question. how are we going to decide which of these projects, how are we going decide with projects should be given priority? i suggest that we create a national infrastructure bank staffed by professionals, not necessarily professionals all of them in transportation. it could be some former members of congress, some former secretaries of transportation. and rank projects on a cost-benefit analysis. rank projects on what they do for transporting people, how

many people they effect on climate change. all of those things on independent rankings systems because the public wants that. the public does not want transportation dollars authorized through the same old system, and certainly not for projects of this magnitude. lastly, how are we going to pay for it? $13 billion as ranking member thune said is a lot of money. it is just a drop in the bucket. how are we going to pay for building a high-speed rail in this country? wo two ways. i would recommend the congress consider using some of the money that comes from the national climate change law to do just that. what better way could we help our climate than getting cars off the road, trucks off the road by building a high-speed rail system? secondly if that money is going to be spoken for elsewhere or if that bill never comes to pass i think the time has come to look for a federal capitol budget.

the federal government is the only political entity in the united states that does not have a capital budget. to have a capital budget and do the things we can do with the capital budget you have to change the way the cbo score. they can't score the total investment. they have just gotten score the debt service. the score what we paid for in that year. a federal capitol budget, even if the federal capitol budget doesn't fund the total of the infrastructure picture, but just fund the infrastructure bank it could work. so the time in my judgment is calling for bold and strong action. we do this the obama administration and this congress will be remembered in the same way the president eisenhower and the congress he worked with is remembered for building the national highway system. >> thank you very much. i did not want you to speed up at the end, but you got me so excited about high-speed. [laughter] thanks very much. now for mr. szabo, we would like

to hear from you. >> thank you, chairman lautenberg, senator hutchison, and members of the committee. certainly an honor to appear today on behalf of president obama, vice president biden, and secretary lahood to discuss the future of high-speed rail. the obama administration has a vision that ensures safe and efficient transportation choices, one that builds a foundation for economic competitiveness, one that promotes energy efficiency and environmental quality, and one that supports interconnected livable communities. and in each case passenger rail is an integral part of that vision. in many cases even modest investments in existing right of way can result in high-speed rail with competitive times and continued unmatched safety

record. transportation is lifeblood of any economy. not only improve mobility but, but obviously the construction will create many short-term jobs. but more more importantly the sustained investment will revitalize domestic rail suppliers in the manufacturing industry. rail is already among the cleanest and most energy-efficient means of moving goods and people. in fact, in one study indicates that implementing the current federally designated high-speed rail corridors would result in an annual reduction of 6 billion pounds of co2. a network, taking our national rail system as a foundation with traditional speeds, and then overlaying high-speed rail corridors of commuter rail systems and providing connections with the transit will provide those interconnected communities that we see.

senator hutchinson mentioned the fact that we have been doing extensive outreach. we feel that is critical in the development of our guidance and as we continue to move forward with the national rail plan we believe that is fundamental. we need to reach out and engage the very stakeholders right from the inception of all of this. particularly pleased that in the seven out recessions that we have conducted so far nearly 1200 people participated with a high level of enthusiasm and with a great deal of very, very beneficial comments that were, in fact, incorporated into the guidance that we just released. our success is going to determine, be determined by these partnerships. like the construction of the highway system, states are going to play a very critical role. we are on track, and we are

using essentially the same model that the europeans did in rolling out high-speed rail. our near-term strategy seeks to advance new expressed high-speed corridor services at speeds over 150 miles per hour in corridors of 200-600 miles. and for corridors of 100-500 miles we seek to develop both emerging high-speed rail corridors at speeds of 90-110 m.p.h. on tracks shared with freight operations and also develop high-speed rail corridors systems at speeds of 100-110 miles per hour on designated tracks. in addition we will be looking to upgrade the reliability quality of traditional 79-mile an hour inner-city service. i'm pleased to report that our guidance document is out. it was out on time. it provides for tracks for possible funding. projects that are individual

projects that have individual utility and individual benefits. a track for corridor programs which is more comprehensive on implementing a full build out t he quarter plan. a track for planning to assist those states that aren't quite as far along but still have a keen interest in implementing high-speed rail plans, and then an area for projects will provide for 50/50 split that will allow the states that are willing to help match dollars allow us to stretch our dollars. the criteria for selection will be based strictly on merit. we will be measuring the public benefit, those that are measurable, achievable, and cost-effective. a key element of that will be the applicant's ability to mitigate risk. the applicant's ability, the fiscal capacity to carry out the project. the fiscal ability to cover

capital and operating expenses, and the ability to have adequate project oversight. this is a transformation for f ra. historically we have been a safety agency, and safety remains our top priority. it is important to note that our passenger rail staff is, you know, our staffing levels are from a quieter era when all we had to do was issued a couple of grants to amtrak or, perhaps, to raise short line railroad. clearly that has changed. we are asking the members of this committee to support the president's fiscal year 2010 budget that starts to address the staffing problems that, you know, managing a program of this magnitude will bring to the agency. and we also ask that project oversight take down the consistent with more, the more traditional 1% instead of the

quarter of 1% that was authorized for us in the recovery act. with that i look forward to your questions. .. about half of our 310 daily trains operate on some part of the northeast corridor which is currently the only high-speed railroad on the continent. ? we built gradually but surely into 150 miles an hour railroad. this has given us is unique and

unparalleled experience in the operation to service above 100 miles an hour under north american conditions. i recently returned from an extensive tour of our western operations. in fact, 9,000 miles worth of riding the train and 47 amtrak-prepared meals. they were all good but i would have had a little more variety. i can assure you that the mood of our employees and our supporters is optimistic. people are excited about the future of amtrak and inner city passenger rail and there's a real sense that we have a historic opportunity ahead of us. the passenger rail investment and improvement act establishes a new partnership between the federal government, the states and the free railroads. this committee played a pivotal role in the enactment of legislation. this is my first appearance before this committee. as president of amtrak and so on behalf of the company, and all of our supporters, i would like to thank the committee and

senator lautenberg and senator hutchison on your wisdom and efforts on our behalf. each entity has a clearly defined role. the states are the strategic planners. they decide which markets should be served by rail and they fund the operating costs for new and expanded corridor services while the federal patching program provides funding for capital projects, states will need to provide the annual funding for those portions of the operating costs that are not covered by revenues. the u.s. department of transportation coordinates state efforts and amsisters the corridor development. amtrak is the nation's rail operator. it designs and provides service on behalf of the states and the federal government in cooperation with the host companies which own much of the railroad right-of-way. this is an extraordinary vision and a lot of the ideas that are contained in it will probably be components of the transportation reauthorization bill that's going to come before congress in the coming years. the american recovery and

reinvestment act expands on it. it provides grant of $1.3 billion. it provides the high-speed railroad, and inner rail and congestion funds. they will focus on attention and funding on those projects could be accomplished in the near term essentially in the next five to seven years. address longer term needs, president obama will make more money available for grant funding. a lot of the discussion that has followed has been about speed but the real issues are trip time and market relevance and the natural yardstick for comparison is the automobile. so when we talk about improving speeds we need to be thinking about those increases in the context of their effect on trip times. frequency is also a major component of relevance. and we need to make sure that we're developing a sufficient number of frequencies in our services to provide travelers with a range of choices.

there are really three ways to build, develop or improve passenger train speeds. the best known method is one that a lot of people have in mind when they say high-speed rail. and it's by an order of magnitude the most expensive and time-consuming. trains that operate routinely in the 150 to 222-miles an hour range. they require a new right-of-way with very high standards of engineering, are dedicated passenger railroads, require the newest and most modern equipment, are electrified and serve relatively few intermediate points. they are basically end-point focus services. another model is the higher speed service that's developed incrementally on an existing railroad. to do this track and infrastructure upgrades are upgraded to an existing line. depending on the route, this could entail some smoothing out of curves and perhaps grades as well as some improvement of grade signalings. this is began in the northeast corridor in 1956 when amtrak

gained control of it and over the year we gradually raised speeds to 125 and then in places to 135 and 150 miles an hour. there is, however, a natural sweet spot at 110 miles an hour that offers some significant advantages. you don't need to close or separate grade crossings. you can operate diesel-powered services with existing equipment. most importantly, you don't necessarily need a dedicated track or a right a way although in some circumstances they might be desirable. those are formidable cost advantages and 110 miles an hour services reduces trip times that make rail service competitive in certain markets. finally, there's the third strategy to improving service. it's reducing the portions of your journey that trains cover at a whether or not you are, very low speeds. our goal is not raw speed. but it's rather an economical, reliable and trip time competitive service. a big part of reducing trip time involves finding ways to raise operating speeds at that low end of the range.

we recently replaced a heavily trafficked crossing in chicago's braeden park. there was no interlocking protection so trains actually had to come to a stop before getting a signal to proceed at 10 miles an hour. we can now move trains through that interlocking at 40 miles an hour and this has allowed us to lop several minutes of operating time through the section. i hope the committee will keep amtrak and inner city passenger rail in mind as it considers some of the impending legislation we expect to see in the coming months. transportation emissions need to be addressed in any a proposed climate change policy solution and that we believe expanded inner city passenger rail offers significant opportunities to reduce carbon emissions. i want to commend chairman rockefeller and chairman lautenberg for their recently introduced surface transportation policy bill. this bill is an excellent framework for the reauthorization and it moves us in a direction of a mode neutral program that uses policy outcomes to guide transportation investments. transportation policy that's focused on outcomes would allow

the federal government to focus its limited resources on investments that achieve real benefits. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> and mr. eckels, we're pleased to have you with us. i didn't mention before that the high-speed rail program transportation corporation that you're with is a texas facility. and we have had the good fortune to work with senator hutchison over the years. i must say she was a light at the end of the tunnel. in the really tough moments that we had. it was pleasure to work with you. thank you. mr. eckels, please. >> we have enjoyed working with senator hutchison over the years on high-speed rail back in the days of the authorities of texas and into our current planning process.

and before you fire your staff, i want to thank them as a party person getting in my testimony today and airplanes and they were very helpful and i appreciate their assistance. i also want to thank ranking member -- are we on? ranking member thune and all the senators for being here today and the interest that you have. in this project in this state and the projects across the country. i believe that this technology will transform transportation and mobility in the united states. and i know that i'm by no means alone in the comments we're hearing today. governor rendell made the good point about high-speed inner city rail passenger service to go at 135 miles an hour and higher we think is the most important thing to remember as we talked about high-speed rail as evidenced by the examples around the world. the projects that actually worked that provided real and significant potential -- to reduce -- to reduce the congestion in our crowded skies and highways, reduce carbon emissions and reduce our demand

for foreign oil, create hundreds of thousands of jobs and stimulate and orchestrate the growth. you're aware of the benefits and we all talked about that today. i was brought here more to discuss how close we are to seeing these benefits and what must be done to ensure where we get where we want to be. the president and secretary lahood have made their vision clear. they want world class high-speed rail in this country. to reap the kinds of benefits that we're talking about today, and senator thune to justify the tremendous investment that has already begun and if increased as recommended by chairman oberstar and ranking member micah and this committee, we must set that bar incredibly high. and governor rendell commented that our country is ready for and must have truly fast and efficient passenger travel, trains that are capable of speeds of 185 miles per hour or more. when president kennedy declared that this country put a man on the moon before the end of the 1960s, he knew that his bold aggressive promise would require a new culture, a new mindset and

ultimately a new administration. in nasa to become a reality. this is the kind of example we need to be mindful today. do misunderstand me i have complete confidence in the united states department of transportation and secretary lahood, his colleagues at the federal railroad administration and i have no doubt the president has assembled a team including administrator szabo and with deputy administrator karen ray we had a pleasure to be with her in houston in one of the outreach sessions they are fully capable of developing it throughout the nation. for the moon shot to become a reality we and that is all of us here and members of congress must work in concert with the same bold vision. we must consider this revolutionary initiative in proper context and recognize that the clear view with the mounting support with groups such as the texas high-speed railroad and transportation corporation the california high-speed rail authority among

many others working closely with other organizations represent a once in a century opportunity to make a real and positive impact on our country's transportation and economic development landscape. let's be certain that we have our eyes on the same prize. passenger trains traveling at 185 miles an hour or more on a new dedicated as mr. wartman talked about a track system and high-speed rail infrastructure -- if we have that separate infrastructure we improve safety, reduce collisions and improve economic benefits to the community. as we look to build this new system, it's important to remember that we're breaking new ground in this nation. it would be wise to provide flexibility in the use of federal funds to provide for market studies and route engineering and environmental studies. in all the projects i've been involved with at the local level, it's primarily been traffic and toll road we are the only county-owned toll road in the nation. it's over 500 lane miles of system. we always built the projects ahead of schedule and under budget. but the key to being ahead of schedule and under budget was having the right schedule and

the right budget and doing the studies beforehand so that we knew what we would be spending in the end. the market and environmental studies are important if we're to attract a private investment as well. in all of the discussions up until most recently have discussed private investment and public/private partnerships. there are places in the world where high-speed rail is at least covering its operational costs and making a profit for investment. there are places in america, too, where high-speed rail can also make sense for private investment and to attract these investors we must show that the routes's survival and the demand can cover cost. to encourage private investment we should offer tax-exempt additional taxes and private activity bonds additional funding and other financial mechanisms that may be available from the federal level. i also would encourage you as we look to different projects we don't put in one formula for one. there's different needs in california, illinois, and texas. in texas we have a linear

airport model and again, senator hutchison has been close with us whether it's a transit system, seaport all of those are operated by cities and counties. if you'll give local governments the opportunity to connect our airports, our seaports, and our transportation metro transportation systems we will for the first time breathe life into a truly viable interconnected mobility system. we're very grateful of the support of the administration's vision for high-speed rail and are encouraged by the size of the financial commitment of discussion for the next surface transportation bill. we're not working under the assumption that the federal government or any state governments alone are prepared to cover the cost of these projects for our country. i do think the government had good comments about being able to sustain the systems that we build. but we believe that the cities and counties have a role to play in that. and are coming together to try to make that work. we do have a local government corporation and the capacity to bring that coalition together to help deliver this project in our state.

and provide service through a 440-mile texas t-bone corridor that senator hutchison would mention. it would bring 1600 texans living together and connect us to the gulf coast and the atlanta and the central corridor and to oklahoma city to little rock and up into memphis and ultimately to the midwest. this project while impressive in its it will require a unique partnership of federal, state and local officials as well as the local sector and very much look forward to working with this committee and with fra and amtrak to make that happen. so thank you very much for having us here and looking forward to questions. >> ms. fleming, we welcome you and ask you to make your remarks now, please. >> mr. chairman, ranking member thune, ranking member hutchison, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss high-speed passenger rail and the american recovery and reinvestment act.

the $8 billion provided by the act for high-speed and other inner city passenger rail projects have focused more attention on and generated a great deal of anticipation about the possibility of developing high-speed rail systems in the united states. my testimony has two parts. i will discuss the factors that we have identified that affect the economic viability of high-speed rail projects and how fra-raised strategic plan incorporates these factors. first, while the potential benefits of high-speed rail projects are many, these projects are costly, take years to develop and build and require substantial upfront public investment as well as potentially long-term operating subsidies. determining which if any high-speed rail projects may eventually be economically viable will rest on the factors such is as ridership potential, costs and public benefits. high-speed rail is more likely to attract riders in densely and highly populated corridors

especially where there is congestion on existing transportation modes. characteristics of the proposed service are also important. as high-speed rail attracts riders where it compares favorably to transportation alternatives in terms of door to door trip times, frequency of service, reliability, safety and price. costs largely hinge on the availability of rail right-of-way, land use patterns and a corridor's terrain. once projects are deemed economically viable project sponsors face the challenging task of securing the significant upfront investment for construction costs and of sustaining public and political support and stakeholder consensus. we found in other countries with high-speed rail systems the central government generally funded the majority of upfront costs of high-speed rail lines. the $8 billion in recovery act funds for high-speed rail represents a significant increase in federal funds available to develop new or enhanced inner city passenger rail service. this amount, however, represents

only a small fraction of the estimated costs for starting or enhancing service on the 11 federally authorized high-speed rail corridors. furthermore, the challenge of sustaining public sector support and stakeholder consensus is compounded by long project lead times, the diverse interest of stakeholders and the absence of an established framework for coordination and decision-making. moving on to my second point, fra strategic plan attempts to address the absence of an institutional framework for investments in high-speed rail. in a recent report, we discussed the need for clear identification of expected outcomes and ensuring the reliability of ridership and other forecasts to determine the viability of high-speed rail and including high-speed rail with a reexamined nation of other federal surface transportation programs to clarify federal goals and roles link funding needs to performance and reduce modal finding stovepipes.

the strategic plan is more a vision than a plan. for example, it does not define goals for investing in high-speed rail. how these investments will achieve them and how the federal government will determine which corridors it should invest in. fra views the strategic plan in a first step in planning federal involvement. it will involve stakeholders to help it flesh out its approach to developing high-speed rail that are under its control. fra officials also told us that it plans to spend recovery act funds in ways that show success to help keep long-term political support for these projects at the local level. in conclusion, the infusion of $8 billion of recovery act funds is only a first step in developing viable high-speed rail projects. the host of seeming intractable issues such as the high cost, uncertain ridership and need for broad political support that have hampered development of these projects is still with us. and these issues we need to be resolved to effectively spend recovery act funds.

surmounting these challenges will require federal, state and other stakeholder leadership to champion the development of economically viable high-speed rail corridors and the political will to carry them out. it will also require clear, specific policies and delineations of expected outcomes and wall street analysis of ridership costs and other factors to determine the viability of projects and their transportation impact. mr. chairman, this concludes my statement. i would be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of this subcommittee might have. >> thank you very much. and now mr. skancke, we welcome you and invite your testimony. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the tough part about being the caboose is that you cover a lot of track that the previous train has covered. [laughter] >> keeping in light with all the other -- >> that mic a little closer, please. >> is that better? >> yeah.

>> good afternoon, chairman lautenbe lautenberg, ranking member thune and members of the committee. thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity to testify today. in 2005 i was appointed to the national surface transportation policy and revenue study commission by senator majority leader harry reid. in january of 2008, after two years of meetings, hearings and research, our commission recommended to congress a vision for transportation policy and funding in america. a new vision which includes a framework that will reform and hopefully revolutionize the way we do transportation policy and funding for the next 50 years. one of our recommendations with substantive reform of our passenger rail system. over the next half century, the united states is projected to add 150 million new residents. at 50% increase over its current population. this increase will cause travel to grow at an even greater rate than the population will. we will need to provide new modal choices which will require a cultural shift for the traving puic.

we recommended that the entire country should be connected by passenger rail by the year 2050. the recommendations also defined that the passenger rail corridor should connect population centers within 500 miles of each other. just 11 months later the gao concluded that the existing inner city passenger rail system is in poor financial condition and the current structure does not effectively target federal funds to where they provide the greatest public benefit such as transportation congestion relief. quota routes generally less than 500 miles in length have higher ridership and perform better financially and appear a greater benefit. we invested $8 billion over the next years. president obama and senator reid and this congress realized that that investment in passenger rail is needed now not over the next 50 years. so $8 billion was put into the stimulus bill to not only create

jobs but to kick start the program to begin a valiant new vision for america's transportation modes. i think this president and senator reid and this congress have a vision for transportation in our nation. and it is much like as president eisenhower which is connecting america. the united states is way behind the curve in passenger rail service as we all know. the far east, near east, europe and the middle east have been investing billions in passenger and freight rail systems in 50 years. our lack of vision and investment is deteriorating our global competitiveness and our quality of life. the nation's new vision should not that just focus on existing passenger rail lines but should expand beyond the current corridors. in my opinion the vision should include a western connection much like the recommendation of our commission. connecting all 22 western states in phases as a system not as pieces should be a priority. the first phase of a western connection is currently being considered and underway which is the desert express high-speed rail passenger corridor connecting victorville,

california, to las vegas. this project will ultimately connect victorville to palmdale, california, thus tying into the california high-speed rail system from los angeles to san francisco. this project will eventually connect three major western metropolitan mega regions. each project meeting the criteria set out by our commission and the gao for being corridors of 500 miles or less. this vision is one that takes leadership and courage to get it done. it can be done. and it should be done. i know having grown up in sioux falls, south dakota, it sure would have been nice to take a 40 to 20-minute trip to minneapolis to go to a vikings game and i was stuck home in a blizzard because we had to travel in a car. it will be difficult to funding and construct but we can do this. this is the united states of america. mr. chairman, i have three policy changes for this committee to consider. in the new authorization. first, we must agree upon a bold new vision and make the cultural

shift in the way we do transportation. a vision an american public can invest in and believe in and have passenger rail that connects america much like the eisenhower era highway system did. we must do today what our parents and our grandparents did for us. invest in a new vision. reform the current program and revolutionize the way we do transportation policy and funding. second, we must reduce the time it takes to deliver a rail project in this country. 20 years in new starts is just too long. we need to get our projects delivered in 3 to 5 years. this is not environmental stream lining as some would like to call it. it's process delivery. agencies cannot just sit on projects. we need to create -- we do not need to create an oversight office. we just need to get the projects out. we don't need to open up the nipa process to get it done. it can be done by redoing duplicative process.

it must be performance based and outgoing basis. reliable time performance, congestion mitigation, safety and environmental benefits and improved choices -- improved choices, mobility options for all communities and reduced energy use. the systems need to be in their own rights-of-way have a minimum amount of shared track in metropolitan areas and on-time passenger service for prohibitibility. -- practicability. albert einstein once against without changing our patterns of thoughts we will not be able to solve our patterns of thought to current patterns of thought. so we can solve the problems we can create with our current patterns of thoughts. mr. chairman, you should be commented for having this hearing today to talk about weep passenger rail. your leadership demonstrates the change is in washington, d.c., and it is right here in this committee. passenger rail is the future of moving americans and now is the

time to make that investment. we need to restore hope and performance in our transportation system. our fellow citizens are counting on us to get it done. thank you. >> thank you all very much for your excellent testimony. i'm going to start -- i think what we'll do is allow 6 minutes for each person. and i would ask governor rendell a question, and that is -- president obama has made high-speed rail a priority. he started with $8 billion in the recovery act. the president also proposed a billion dollars for each of the next five years for high-speed rail. now, what sources of funding might congress consider for these future high-speed rail investments but before i ask you

to answer, i would say -- you got to be a little cautious with the climate change money. we are working arduously to say that there are many problems. some of them more severe than others. among them is our infrastructure focused today on rail. but also on climate change to make it possible for generations that follow to be able to breathe the air and conduct a healthy life with climate change and one of the best things for climate change is i think you said is high-speed rail, efficient rail. so what sources of funding might congress consider for these future high-speed rail systems? and you said it earlier.