my view, was in the d block 700 megahertz range and you would think that would've been ideal. and the principle they are is, what if we take a segment of spectrum and we have two shared between public safety and a commercial network. with the understanding that when there's an emergency or in need in the public safety area, they could accommodate more and more of the fact round. but under normal circumstances, the commercial area would use it. and in exchange for having this money making capability, the commercial people could pay for the whole network in the public safety people would reap the benefits. i thought that was ideal. and somehow that didn't work out. i suspect it was for several

reasons. one is the fcc established a price level that was too high to attract people who had to build up the system. and that was unfortunate because i think they should've given it away. if somebody would actually build that system, think about how we would all benefit. in the second is there is a question in some people's mind about whether you could commercialize the knotwork or when there's an emergency you lost the service. well, i don't think there's any question about that at all. somehow there is a view, which i do not subscribe to that all systems have to be the same. the author of the same level of reliability. i have a vision of a world where there are lots of different kinds of systems. and if you cut the price down low enough for service and say well, you're going to have to have this service 95% or 90% of the time. but there's an emergency you'll be out of business, but boys at

low cost. if you go you find a lot of customers. so i hope this concept of a shared existence which went public safety and commercial is brought back to life. >> host: marty cooper, what's your thoughts about some of the brain cancer warnings that has been given about cell phone? >> guest: well first of all, but me tell you, peter, i am not a.err. i am a very heavy cell phone user. i've been using portable two-way radios for 50 years. i hate to talk about those. you might even figure out how old i am if you keep doing that. there've been lots and lots of studies. as far as i know, there has never been a conclusive demonstrated study that has shown that there is an effect on the human body.

there is some people that theorize that, but we don't know of any specific effects. right now the only effect were really aware of about energy is the way you cook food in your microwave oven. it is true that you hold a cell phone up to your head out of your brain is being warmed up. fortunately for us, it's insignificant. the amount of energy coming out of that antenna on your cell phone is so low that they cpsi is inevitable. if you walk past a radio station and you get far more energy. so between all those things that i would learn about using the cell phone, but i'm not suggesting you shouldn't worry about it. and if you really cared, and many thought to use a hands-free telephone, the people that are really worried about it just give up their cell phones. i could count the number of people in the world that do that on one hand. >> host: what are the

similarities between your 1973 brick found and the iphone today? do they share traits? >> guest: well, the brick talked and that was it. it's very hard to buy a phone like that. there was a phone like that on the market that my wife invented called the jitterbug and you could buy one and at the moment the jitterbug is focused on older people because older people are smart enough to know that a phone doesn't necessarily have to have 100 functions. you don't touch of a camera and an mp3 player, web access and all these other features. >> yes you do. are you saying you don't tweet. >> guest: and twitter. and an instruction manual that's bigger and heavier than the phone itself. all we can do with that first telephone -- and by the way, all

we even imagine that we could do was to have superior telephones that was not change to the wall or to your desk. the only defense we have of not having a better vision was there were no computers in 1973 if you could imagine that. no personal computers. and there were no cordless phone, no cameras, no digital cameras you're so it was even -- it was very hard to imagine that somebody would someday try to consolidate all these things into one little box. >> host: what kind of cell phone do you have? >> guest: depends when you ask me. i always have the latest cell phones and i try every cell phone out, only because people like you keep asking me. right now i'm using the droid because i want to get some experience with the android operating system.

and i so far have had some favorable results. i've had an iphone, which i gave to my grandson in which used for three months and then had to upgrade to a better version. and i've tried many other phones. for my day-to-day conversations, i actually use a jitterbug. so i carry two phones. one very simple phone that i can flip open and have a very simple phone book and nothing else. but when i want to twitter, tweet, then i use my droid. >> host: one last quick question. >> you're on the commission of the spec your advisor commission. they advise them, can you give us a sense of what you hope that advisory committee would accomplish in advising the commerce department on spectrum? >> guest: well, i take these

things very seriously. and you've heard all of my opinions and you can tell i'm not bashful, peter. and so, we've got some really smart people, including yourself obviously, and we are advising the commission and the commerce department, the assistant secretary specifically in a number of areas. but we're trying to establish incentives as an example so that people who have spectrum are incentivized to actually use it more efficiently and maybe let other people share the spectrum. so we are advising the assistant secretary and how to respond to a congressional requirement to do an inventory. we are advising them in areas that have to do with the transparency of who is using the spec around. so it's an interesting committee because there are some very

brave people on it. it's also interesting in the sense that there are disagreements that probably surprises you. all the smart people don't necessarily work with each other on these things. >> host: thank you for coming to "the communicators." paul kirby, telecommunication.

>> homeland security secretary, janet napolitano, announced the administration nominee to head the transportation security administration. robert harding, formerly served as the director of operations at the defense intelligence agency. the president original nominee withdrew his name following objections by senate republicans. secretary napolitano spoke for about five minutes. >> this is a critical leadership

position for the security of our nation. by nominating general harding for this very important job, the administration is calling on an individual with more than 35 years of experience as an army commander, a senior military intelligence officer, a high-level manager of intelligence operation and a successful business manager ceo in the security field. the general believed all of these talents as he takes the home of this vital agency. tsa's mandate is a broad one. they're responsible not only for u.s. aviation security, but also for safeguarding our rail, bus, mass transit and tracking systems as well. the general will be a tremendous asset in our current efforts bolster security and screening measures at our domestic airports. i deploy an additional airport law enforcement officials, behavior detection officers, air marshals and explosives detection canine teams, and the security measures. and fixing the gaps in our

international civil aviation system as well. on friday we announced at the first 11 airports that will receive advanced imaging technology units purchased with american recovery and reinvestment act dollars. the state-of-the-art machines are enhancing our capability to detect and disrupt threats of terrorism across their nation. we expect to deploy a total of 450 units by the end of 2010 and our fy 2011 budget calls for 500 more. we have accelerated the deployment of this enhanced technology and strengthen our other layers of aviation security, partially in response to the attempted terrorist attack on december the 25, which served as a stark reminder of the evolving tactics of violent extremists will pursue to threaten our international aviation system, to thwart the security measures put in place since 9/11 and to kill innocent men, women and children.

the international dimensions of this incident and the international threat posed by radical extremism required an international response as well. right now, dhs is working on an international effort to build consensus on strengthening international aviation security. since january, that with my european counterparts and my north, south and central american and caribbean colleagues in mexico last week to discuss ways to bolster international security measures and standards. these meetings so far have produced very encouraging results, including joint declarations to strengthen the international civil aviation system between the united states and the european union and between the united states and argentina, brazil, canada, chile, dominican republic, mexico and panama. on friday, my japanese counterpart transport minister seiji behar and i announced will join with our counterparts in the asia-pacific region in tokyo

this week to continue building this international consensus. make no mistake, we are engaged in an aggressive effort to strengthen the international aviation system against terrorists who are currently seeking ways to exploit gap and port security measures. and general harding is precisely the kind of leader we need as we move forward in this effort. his national security expertise is working in the international community and years of service in the united states army will be an invaluable addition to the departments efforts to bolster security and ensure the safety of the nation's transportation systems. and i might add that as a retired u.s. army major general, bob also has another distinguished veteran to the senior ranks of the department of homeland security. let me close by saying this, the tsa administrator is among the most important unfilled posts in the obama administration.

the president and i both believe that general harding has the experience and perspective to make a real difference in carrying out the mission of this agency. if there were ever a nominee who warned it expedited and detailed consideration of the senate, this is it. we hope that the commerce and homeland security committees will be able to work expeditiously to complete their hearing process and so that his nomination may move to the floor for confirmation. i applaud the president. this is a superb choice. i look for to switch senate confirmation and i look forward to having bought on board at the tsa very, very soon. thank you, general. thank you all. >> community leaders from around the nation held a news conference to express concerns about the obama administration's immigration enforcement policy. they talk about the effective

detention and deportation on families and communities. this one-hour event is hosted by the coalition called the f.a.i.r. immigration reform movement. >> today i join my colleagues from immigrants and civil rights organizations from across the country to denounce the cruel and inhumane immigration enforcement practices that are carried on trade carrying our communities and families apart. these are the same enforcement practices that we marched against during the bush administration. these are the same enforcement practices that we now are forced to denounce and march again under the obama administration. many of us celebrated the historic election of barack obama and believe that his election would bring justice to immigrants and their families. we believe that then candidate for president, barack obama, when he promised to fix our broken immigration system.

he said he would do this in his first year in office. he said that he would stop the rate and practices that deviated from our american values of inclusiveness, justice and equality. yet, in the first year the obama administration, immigration and customs enforcement has supported 387,000 people. you could see the increase in this chart. this is a record high number of deportations and an increase of close to 50% from fiscal year 2008. this is an average of 1000 deportations per day, every day, detention and removal operations hold an average of 32,000 people in detention centers across this country. immigration not it's of employers have tripled, resulting in the destruction of whole industry and other immigrants and made his point laborforce.

finally, this administration has continued agreements with local law enforcement agencies that are clearly violating the civil and human rights of entire communities. millions of citizens and new americans voted for change and what they got as far as immigration issues are concerned are just more, much more of the same. we have waited for over a year without legislative progress on comprehensive immigration reform. without reform, there's still no relief for the millions of families across the country. so mr. president and the congress, we are bringing our demands to your backyard on march 21 in our march for america. change takes courage mobilization. our expectation is that by march 21, president barack obama, you exercise your leadership by helping move forward a blueprint for a bipartisan immigration reform bill and a real timeline for getting a markup in the senate

judiciary committee. in the meantime, we demand an immediate stop to paul deportations because each one of these deportations, each one of these numbers equals a life destroyed and a family devastated. [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue]

[speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] nate [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] and now to tell us her story on

how immigration enforcement has impacted her family and want to introduce her. >> hello, my name is beatrice vasquez. i'm a u.s. citizen i'm 15 years old and i love chirla. to start off, i would like to talk about my mother. to me she's my hero. she is strong and independent, a hard worker, tries to provide for her children and makes an honest living. my mother is my rock, someone that motivates me and pushes me to accomplish my dreams. she came to the u.s. for a better future. one day i.c.e. came pounding on my door looking for my mother. i felt scared.

at the moment she was not home. they tried to interrogate me and my stepdad who was present. they gave up and laughed. they are biased at 6:00 a.m. and left at 6:40 a.m. i had to get ready to go to school. on my way to school, i was wondering if i was ever going to see my mother again. in my first period class, during my first period class, that same day, i broke down in tears. the next day when i was returning from school, i had noticed that i was being followed. i noticed that in the corner of my block there was a black man with one little i saw this or that it come the previous day. and on the other side came a red

range rover passing by very slowly. they had noticed the house door. as i walked in i was telling myself that i was being followed. we approached the window and we see i.c.e. approaching the property. they had asked my stepdad to step outside. moments later i opened the door and saw him handcuffed. they took into downtown detention center and asked him more questions. they had detained him the whole day. without him and my mom i was allowed in being taken care of by friends and family. i couldn't be in an environment where i was being followed. i couldn't be without my mother. children my age shouldn't be living a life like i did. i couldn't do stuff, go out with my friends, without being followed. kids my age are planning for their future, they want to make

something of themselves. but yourself in a situation that i had to go through. it's not easy. in november 2008, when the situation happened, barack obama became president. my family how does that he was going to stop family separation and that he was going to do something. to show you are against family separation and that you are a true president, a president that keeps his word. like i said, the president says you are the hope that you are going to make a change. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. and this is happening despite their many contributions of immigrants. our next speaker is pramila jayapal who is director of one

america, the immigrant rights coalition in washington state. >> thank you great immigrant workers have long been the backbone of america's economy, building railroads, operating mines, harvesting crops and working in canneries. immigrants have always done the hard work that was asked of them and we always will. but today we are here to say that we are tired of a broken immigration system that forces immigrant workers to live in the shadows just because elected leaders don't have the courage to fix the system that serves no one except they hate and fearmongers who seek to divide america. we are tired of the bureaucracy that keeps the malays apart for decades and we are tired of being made promises to and then holding her crying children like beatrice as they watched their parents being taken away and deported. we know all about the recession this country then because immigrants and other people of

power are the first people often to lose their jobs. and we also know that immigration reform will be an economic boost to this country. the center for american progress has reported that passing an immigration reform bill would actually put $1.5 trillion into our economy over the next decade. the cato institute has written that immigrants increase the total economy and raise the standard of living of american citizens. and just last week, ben bernanke, chairman of the federal reserve board listed immigration reform is one of the issues that congress must take up to improve the nation's lagging economy. so today as our economy struggles out of a recession, we know we have an economic recovery package right here in immigration reform. and yes, we are spending billions and billions on enforcement that adds insult to injury by deporting the very

workers that will get this economy. this administration seems proud to out and force the bush administration, deporting on average 1000 immigrants a day, 1000 mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers. 1000 human beings who are doing the work our economy needs. a thousand immigrants who make life better, not only for themselves and their families but for all of us who live in america. we've watched the so-called paperweights tear apart our communities. and in my home state in brewster, washington, on christmas eve 2009 approximately one quarter of the town of brewster was laid off due to an i-9 audit of one of the largest orchards in america, the town and businesses are still reeling and the fruit is still rotting in the fields. so this is not sound economic policy nor is it found oil

policy. this is not leadership in this is not change we can believe in. we expect more. we expect the president to order his administration to stop the deportations and to demonstrate leadership on passing immigration reform, an issue that has been shown time and time again to be a bipartisan issue that's essential for our future and for america. immigrant voters across the country have the audacity to hope when candidate obama became president obama. it's time to deliver. our patience has run out. thank you. [applause] >> our next speaker is brent wilkes, national executive of the united latin american citizens, the oldest and largest hispanic civil rights organization in the united states. >> thank you. in july of 2008, candidate barack obama attended the dimension addressed over 4000

delegates. and he told us that immigrants who are working hard and contributed to this economy deserved a break. he said if he was elected president he would pass comprehensive immigration reform in the first year of his presidency. now fast-forward 21 months. many of the delegates that were there believed him. they thought a candidate obama became resident that we would have comprehensive immigration reform. but one thing they never believed in their wildest dreams is that president obama would have a record like this, where he surpasses the bush administration and deportations. it is unconscionable to have over 387,000 people deported in the first year of obama presidency. and our community is angry. our members feel betrayed. and it's not just the deportations. in addition to the deportations, the raids that president obama said he would stop have

continued. over 2000 raids, immigrants have been detained in raids in the first year of his administration. and just two weeks ago, homeland security completed a three-day sweep in texas, arresting over 284 immigrants and about 119 were from dallas fort worth area. about 80 were arrested in san antonio and this is part of a new stepped-up wave of arrests that the administration planned. this is happening at the same time that the u.s. census bureau is sending out census forms across the united states. and unlike previous administrations, both in 1990 and 2000, which backoff on immigration enforcement in this time. come this administration appears to be doubling down at a time in the community can be scared away from filling out the census. that is a big shame because we've seen immigration enforcement during the census timeframe can continue to huge undercounts in the latino

community. with the undercounts, like a securities across the country. we are very concerned. and that's her story is told us, the collateral damage that is left in the wake of internal immigration is far too often overlooked in this debate, especially considering the children they bear the brunt of such enforcement policies. there are roughly 5.5 million children currently living in the u.s. with at least one author writes terry. and at least three quarters of these children are u.s.-born citizens. the department of homeland security estimates that in the last ten years more than 100,000 immigrant parents of u.s. citizen children have been deported from the united states. can you imagine over 100,000 stories just like beatrice is happening in this country. it is a shame. and we're also hurting yourselves. you know, the cost of mass deportation to our economy is staggering. the center for american progress, the same study quoted earlier also estimates the mass

deportation would reduce u.s. gross domestic product at $2.6 trillion over ten years and that's not even including the actual cost of deportation. this economic impact of this deportation would lead to widespread job losses throughout the united states. and not only that, there's a lot of evidence that the stepped-up enforcement of the bush years and now into the obama years actually helped trigger the housing bust that now has led to this economic recession, one of the worst that we've seen since the great depression. so we're hurting ourselves by being immoral and attacking hard-working immigrants in the united states. he had a simple message. stop the deportations. have comprehensive immigration reform. resident obama come he promised our members, you promised our community. please deliver. thank you. [applause] >> in our search for leadership from washington d.c., we find ourselves not finding it. and so we go back to our

communities and seek out the leadership there. to speak about some of the actions that are taking place around the country, i want to now introduce artemio arreola who today represents the american coalition for reform. >> i've been in chicago for the last 20 years and i remember in 2008 was my first election i participated in. in november, the same 10,000 latinos and we are excited of our charismatic. .. what happened later? we are thinking is it stop deportations, we hope we make it. look at what's happening. around 1,000 people, -- 1,000 faces deported every day.

the latinos are frustrated. we demand solutions, and we told the president he is not alone. we can count with us. legalization is a solution. we want it now. we want to tell also, those voters, we will keep voting in the single election. but more important, we have memory. we will remember. [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in spanish]

[speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish]

[speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish]

[applause] >> our next speaker is the executive director of the korean resource center in los angeles. >> hayek, today, we are here for one reason. on march 21, thousands of thousands of immigrants who were born in different countries who spoke different languages, from different cultures will be marching for one reason. the reason is very simple but powerful. we care about this country. we care about america. together, we want to live in america where young people, talented, smart young people have full access to higher education so they can be a

teacher, social worker, so they can contribute to our community. together, we want to live in america. the hard-working people have respect and family members stayed together so they can be so productive for the work, employment, school for this country. but sadly, it is not happening in america any more. people are suffering, just because immigration status. millions and millions of people cannot drive, can't go to school, living in fear every day. is this the america we want to live and? is this the america we want to transfer to our next generation? in 2008 many members of this nation voted for change, and we voted or people who can and this

suffering. we have been waiting, waiting, waiting but our president, our congress member-- so now we say, we can't take it any more. wake up or go do something. we cannot take this any more. on march 21, all people from all across the nation will be coming nla our committee member will sell food, raise $50,000. young people are going to rent a van and drive more than 2000 miles to come to the city, not only l.a., chicago, all over the nation. they are coming to d.c. for america. we care about this country and we need action.

we need real action obama, we need real action congress member. the time is right now. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. our next speaker is nitza segui albino with the national alliance of latin american and caribbean communities. >> good morning. my name is needs a segui albino. i am a member of the executive committee of the national alliance of latino caribbean communities. it is a network of over 80 immigrant organizations of latin american caribbean located in 15 states throughout the united states. we have public policies that address the root causes of migration and working to improve the quality of life of our communities in the united states and our countries of origin.

we join in organizations present here today to denounce the escalation of deportations and detentions by the immigration and custom employment agency, ice and to call president obama to assist in enforcing a broken immigration policy that is simply immoral. and immigration system that breaks families apart and that continues to reinforce the notion that immigrants, particularly those of latin american and caribbean origins are a threat to our nation is just immoral. to continue to use the objective, illegal immigrants, is dehumanizing and opens the door for right-wing extremist attacks on our communities. the branding of human beings as illegals must stop. while campaigning, president obama spoke about the invaluable contributions by today's immigrants and how mistaken to blame immigrants for our

nation's ills. because we know that president obama understands that the immigration system is broken. attacking hard-working immigrants and their families, he focuses on fixing the broken and wasteful immigration system and is solving the problems that afflict the majority of people in our society. lack of employment opportunities, the loan crisis, lack of decent and affordable access to health care and the predatory behavior by banks and other financial institutions. and a lack will continue to work for humane sustainable immigration policy that reflects the best traditions of america and who we are as a country of immigrants, as well as the principles of justice and equality for all in the founding principles of our nation.

mr. roh palma, we are the people , stop deportations. we want a sustainable immigration policy now. thank you. [applause] >> our next speaker to speak on how we are going to hold our leadership accountable, how we are going to marching continue to fight is the board of the new york immigration coalition. >> that afternoon. my name is linda and i'm a new york immigration coalition on umbrella organization of 200 immigrant organizations throughout new york. i am here today to tell president barack obama to stop brushing immigrants as i. we need reform and we need it now. we need immigration reform for nation security and for a nation's prosperity. we need to keep our families together. is not what this country is all about? coming from new york i have to

say that our senator, senator chuck schumer has taken the lead on pushing immigration reform in the senate. we want to tangle him for his efforts but also keep in mind efforts alone have not stopped the pain and suffering in our communities. we understand that later today senator schumer, senator graham and senator obama will be meeting about immigration. our message is clear and simple. do not come out of that meeting unless you can commit to immediate steps to end deportations and a concrete timeline for enacting reform legislation this year. if they emerge from their meeting without the steps up to only ever believe their commitment to immigration reform? president obama, as a young american i voted for you because they voted for change. but what we have seen as more of the same, more deportations, more raids in more broken families. show was your leadership by bringing comprehensive reform

and making it a reality for us. today i stand here from new york but on march 21000 new new yorkers will be dissenting on the capital to send us a message we have sent here today, comprehensive immigration reform this year, not next year, now. thank you. [applause] >> our final speaker is emma lopez executive director of centro sin fronteras. >> i come from chicago and also from the church. we salute washington d.c. and we will be back very shortly. we are here today to tell president obama, nancy pelosi, harry reid, chuck schumer and

our senator, dick durbin that they need to have more courage, that they need to be like our congressman luis gutierrez because you have only 13 days left to keep your promise to the latino community. remember if it wasn't for them he would not have one that are now the new blue states that were historically red states. and if you don't do what we ask you to do, what you promise to do, we will leave you where we found you before we voted you into office. because, friends key promises. [speaking in spanish] you don't act like our friends. you have not only broken your promises to move immigration reform, you have made the situation worse. deporting more people, separating more families, breaking more of our children's hearts than did the republicans in their final aggressive year. you have the power.

you must use it or you will lose it. we will not live peacefully in a nation that is at war with our community and with our families. don't mistake our faith for weakness. remember what jesus said. i did not come to bring peace but a sword. what god has put together, no man, no government, no party should tear apart. he will put on the armor of the lord and we will come to washington. it is showdown time. we are united more than ever before and we will mobilize more than ever before. you know how we are when we mobilize because we have had the largest mobilizations in the history of this country. we have 200 buses scheduled to leave chicago preparing now to join the march for america here

in washington d.c. on march 21. the ground is already shaking. i can hardly hear the footsteps to the capital. justice delayed is justice denied. we will be in washington with all of our families, all of our churches, all of our young men and women, all of our children and we pray god sends you there to meet us with a bill already introduced, not a blueprint. like i said, a bill already introduced in moving both in the house and senate. from now on, stop the raids, stop the deportation, stop the separation of families. [speaking in spanish] [applause] >> we are coming to washington

from each of the coast. we are going to be here. we are going to be in the tens of thousands. we want are forced to be hurt. we want our demands to be listened to and most importantly we want results. this concludes our presentation portion of our press conference. we are now open for questions from the press, and what i ask is that the speakers come forward and that the u.s. members of the press actually address the speaker that you would like to answer the question if that is the case. >> i guess it is addressed to you mainly. for what specific or realistic window of opportunity do you see for cir and congress. nothing has happened so far. we will see what they have to say after the meeting later this afternoon but are you concerned that that window is closing on you and what would be a realistic framework to get it done this year? >> we are very clear that that window is closing and that is

why we are going to see to open it wide open, because we need to make sure our representatives actually do their job this year. there is an opportunity to actually put the issue of immigration reform on the calendar, to have a debate and vote on the issue and that is our expectation. it can happen if there is political will and political will, when communities across the country lift up their voices and pressure their elected officials to do their job. thank you. yes, over here. [inaudible] >> let me be clear, we are adamantly opposed to a boycott and census. the census represents $10,000 for every person that completes the form and that is just

talking about the financial benefits to come from the federal government to our communities. we would be insane to boycott the census and put our communities at risk to receive those financial dollars. in addition the census will help latino immigrant communities to pick up needed seats in the u.s. congress. we are expecting pickups in the range of two seats in texas to several seats in california and many seats throughout the united states and if we are not counted we won't have the chance to engage in a whole redistricting process so there is no boycott, we do not support such a thing. on the other hand we have asked the president to stop the deportation, stop the raids, stop enforcement activity during this critical timeframe. his predecessors both republican and democratic honored that request in the past. this year the president has denied it. we think that is a huge mistake. we don't understand what his rationale is for continuing this certainly a month or two of

pause would not harm our u.s. security. but, we have not received the answer we want from the president. we are hoping he still comes to the re-election that he should call off the ice in the homeland security while this critical processes taking place. thanks. >> suzanne from ap. i guess i addressed this to address this to those of you in washington, based in washington but also you that understand the politics of everything. there is a high popularity rate among hispanics for obama, or there has been the last time i checked. there is some legislation that has been passed or has been worked on and is still being worked on in the health care reform bill, that could greatly benefit latinos in the u.s.. there are some realities about the latino vote in that it is really not expected to be out in large numbers in the midterms like any other boat but probably

lower. and there is some reality about the party that you are criticizing and some of the things they stand for that might benefit the hispanic community re-election, no if getgration reform. elected simply because they are pushing through health care health care reform. >> first of all the democratic leadership needs to understand that when you talk to latinos or you talk to any of the american people and you make a promise that you should keep your word. first of all. there is always a consequence where do you are a child and your mother told you to do something and he said yes and then you didn't do it, there is always a consequence. it is the same consequence. it is okay to criticize the president and the democratic leadership when they have

to do what they said they were going to do, and if you don't apply that consequence there will be no change. historically, you have to prove to them that they will have to pay a consequence in order to change. look at how we are disciplining her children. >> and i would like to add that we expect our leaders, our elected representatives to come to washington d.c. and actually to get a job done. all of us come from different communities outside of washington. we are the ones who hit the pavement and encourage our community to come out and vote and every single person who votes expects when they come to washington they are not just bickering with each other but they are actually understanding that they have the power to change people's lives and that is our expectation. so we are in search of that leadership and if the leadership has not been elected yet we are going to find that leadership and elect them into office. another question please? be du think this taxi were

taking today represents change in your strategy? i remember early on just after president obama took office, talking to some of you and the feeling seemed to be we understand he has a lot on his agenda, we really want some kind of immigration change this year but we understand it might not be the first thing in might even take more than a year. there was a sense that he has a lot of other priorities and you were sort of understanding of staff. today's time struck me is markedly different. do you characterize what you are talking today is a change? >> the answer to that is yes and actually i'm going to pass it over to pramila jayapal. >> absolutely. i think we all understood there were many things on the table but the reality is that immigration reform is about economic recovery. it is about jobs. it is about getting our country back on the right track, so now

we are saying we have been waiting and we see one of the best economic recovery package is eating ignored because of lack of leadership and lack of courage. so i think we understand how intertwined the immigration system is with everything else the economy, that we face in the economy and everything else america faces. we are not ready to wait any more. it doesn't make economic sense than and it doesn't make moral sense a we are now out of time, out of patience and ready to push forward. all of the power we have collectively in our states across the country to make sure that we really are going to get this change that was promised to us. >> i also want to add to that that some of us, despite our understanding of so many things that needed to get done, we agree on something, that administratively president obama could have done certain things and stopping deportation was an

number one priority for our community. instead, this is happening. if it doesn't stop, and if we don't say it now, it will continue growing. and it will be late, and yes sometimes the democratic party thinks that they have us. they don't. we just want to let you know, you don't. if you do the right thing, you will have us. if you don't, you won't have us. that is just the bottom line. we are tired. it is time for action. >> yes? >> hi, my name is jim and i'm a reporter for the times. i have a question for dae joong yoon. you told me that the deportation of many korean people-- [inaudible]

around 240-- and do you have any information about how many people were deported last year according to the data? how many people. >> i just want to say it is not about a latino issue or go it is not about an asian issue. it is not about a korean issue. it is about a people's issue. you were members of a community, your neighbor and your church members. children are crying looking for their mother. young people can't go to school. they can't even drive. is this about race? no comment is about a people's issue. talking about economic power and boosting america's economy.

people get legalized, they get a drivers license, they buy a car, buy insurance and the automobile factories hire workers. and they buy a house. it is about the best way to get our community back on the track. in this country we have about 50 million asian pacific islanders. about 1.5 million. people are waiting and waiting to be be united with their loved ones. on top of that 1.5 million api or undocumented. as i saidcome it is not about api, latino. it is a people's issue and what are we going to do about that america? >> others?

i am lauren from "nation magazine. i was wondering if maybe you could talk more about what you envision for copperheads of immigration reform and specifically when you are looking at something like ice which is consistently used its power, has to tensions that are hidden and abusing human rights on a consistent basis. we are using big term comprehensive immigration reform but what you mean by that and what are the bare minimums you well except? what is the real ask? >> right now, first and foremost what we are requesting his political action on comprehensive immigration reform and comprehensive immigration reform's remains released her family and that relief comes by legalizing the 12 million undocumented migrants in this country many who are children. relief means reuniting families, reducing the backlog and make insure families can be together. it means workers rights. it means workers rights for immigrant workers in native foreign workers so we actually have good wages and good jobs

that we can all him and in america that we can feel proud of. and talking about due process, we are talking about their treatment in every aspect of life. that is what we mean by copperheads of immigration reform and that is why we march and that is why we are not going to give up until it happens. another question? [inaudible] >> the second part is-- [speaking in spanish]

[speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] in chicago we sell tickets for $100. if we don't have the money we go to the local business and they help us. this is the people's campaign. we are financing this campaign. each bus costs $5000 and 200 passes is $1 million to bring

10,000 people to d.c. from chicago to d.c.. >> they are offering singing and dancing so you can be a witness to this historic march for america so they can keep their families together. [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] >> we are doing grassroots actions across the country to get to washington d.c. because we are going to be here on the

21st. [speaking in spanish] [speaking in spanish] we are fighting for copperheads of immigration reform because what was promised was comprehensive immigration reform and in comprehensive immigration reform you have the dream act that will help students. you have ag jobs it will help farmworkers and comprehensive immigration reform seeks not to leave people behind so that it helps people living in urban areas in the same way that it helps people in rural areas and that is what we are fighting for so all of our community has relief.

[speaking in spanish] >> the next question please? >> this might be something to technical and we can talk may be afterwards but how much of a sense do you have up the breakdown of this increase in deportations in my understanding from reading that report is it is specifically referring to deportations by i.c.e. as opposed to other forms of remote like voluntary departure, but just that figure they are. do you know what is the cause of such a large numerical increase, and in particular, as you know the administration did make an announcement that they were ending the kind of worksite enforcement that we had seen in the last year of the bush menstruation and to some extent it seemed like that was occurring but perhaps there are other kinds of enforcement going on. i'm just trying to understand

how much his expansion of secure immunities and how much of it is that kind of enforcement that particularly raised concerns in your community like worksite raids. >> the answer is that every year over the last 10 years we have increased the number of personnel committed to interior enforcement and border enforcement and as a result the increase has been pretty dramatic of the number of people being apprehended each year and a ported so this is an increase in people who are being deported by i.c.e.. it is a dramatic increase even from the bush. we believe that is because the obama administration intentionally set out to try to show he was tougher than the bush administration and they have been able to accomplish a significant increase in the number of people deported. he did say he would stop some of the workplace raids but the fact is those are continuing and in

addition to that they have been using other tactics that have put terror into the communities, things like saying they are going after folks who work ramallah aliens but that could include people who disobey a deportation order so people who are pretty much administrative folks who are nothing but hard-working immigrants trying to contribute to this economy and trying to contribute to this country are being caught up in this increased enforcement so we are concerned about what the administration has done. they have argued that they have tried to create space for comprehensive reform by doing this but the fact is the space has been created, the. we have had the bad stuff come through. but the promise of comprehensive immigration reform that was supposed to accompany this never happened and airwave behind the times. the window is closing quickly. there is not a lot of indication at this point from administration that the promise they made, yes there would be some more enforcement but at the

same time we would be passing comprehensive immigration reform, all you have seen the anger in the community has come back and people are very frustrated and very upset. we did not expect this from this administration. >> yes. >> i would like to follow-up on suzanne houseman question about politics in november. if that latino voters get angry and disappointed with democrats and don't turn out in some of these tight races, aren't you worried that you will elect republicans that are less sympathetic to what you are trying to do? >> what we are doing is we are wanting elected representatives that do their job and the push on the issues we care about, and the thing about it is that they are not getting reelected it is because they are not getting anything done. people are not going to go to the polls. doesn't matter if you are latino, asian, black, white, you

are not going to go to the polls to vote for people who are incompetent. right now what we are asking is, do your job, do it well, represent your communities across this country. that is what we want and i think the immigrant community as new americans, as people who understand the values and the value of democracy to many times came from different countries because they were fleeing tyranny understand that democracy is only real when people hold their elected representatives accountable. i actually want to pass the mic to lisa to talk about the work they are doing with their electives in new york. >> we have a similar situation right now in new york city in congressional district 13 where we were able to help elect a democratic congressman, michael macmahon in staten island and southwest brooklyn and we have been talking to him about copperheads them about copperheads of immigration reform and how he needs to be a leader. he also has voted against health

care reform. what we have been doing is we can speak to republicans in a way that makes sense. we are educated, and what republicans care about is the economy and we talk about immigration reform and talk to republicans about how it will benefit the economy and there are republicans who are looking at comprehensive immigration reform in a way that makes sense for them and again just because you were not supporting one democrat does not take-- we want to let democrats know we are not just going to vote democrat. we are going to the issues and i think that is mistake we have done in the past where we have been voting party and we in new york have a group of people from all over the state that had been lobbying and as you can see our senator chuck schumer has been a leader and an advocate in advocate in immigration reform and senator gillibrand is

sympathetic and a supporter of the three mac. we believe our efforts are not going unnoticed. we need people to support people like gutierrez, chuck schumer and kirsten gillibrand so i think our efforts are really being hurt. >> just to follow-up again, i spoke to an official at the white house this morning about those numbers, and the one thing that stood out from what they said is, you also have to consider that some of those numbers were for the first part of the fiscal year 09 which president bush was still in power. obama only came in power in january so that is their argument, that some of those numbers reflect the outgoing bush administration. and also, the point about you not being satisfied with what they have done so far in terms of border enforcement and other law enforcement measures inside

the u.s., the argument is that to satisfy those conservatives that are pushing for tougher enforcement, to get them to come to the table and come to, find a common ground, and then go ahead and talk about legalizing the undocumented population, so would that be a f.a.i.r. enough compromise? you make a concession in terms of border enforcement and other law enforcement measures in return for cir. >> the question is there hasn't been any return. that is the problem. there hasn't been any return on this enforcement. just more enforcement. did you ask them come if these are the numbers that happen before january, then why do we have what happened to the numbers after january when you were in charge? you did not stop it. for many people you made it worse. the stories that come in every

day. there is a chance to stop this enforcement. they can do it. there is no of skews. those numbers should not have risen over the top like they did. >> i want to also cautioned the administration to play immigration reform with poker chips have basically, let's negotiate. let's give you a pathway to legalization but let's infringe on your civil liberties and strengthen border patrol and as you have seen recently with the tsa guidelines and other issues that are effecting many communities to help on the undocumented community that will be affecting other communities affected by border patrol, airport securities which are also part of this one larger comprehensive immigration reform bill. for me personally comprehensive reform, we won't settle for less and i really caution our politicians and elected officials and administration to plate like a poker chip because he will be affecting others, so it is either one package or we

will keep working to the last day until we get everything we want in comprehensive immigration reform. >> it is disingenuous for the administration to argue that this is not about their actions. i don't think, if you asked them, that they would want to say they didn't have their eye on the ball for the first couple of months they were in office. i think they would want to project they are an administration that is control of all of the actions that have happened since they took office and i think the reality is you couldn't have numbers like this was just a few months of carryover from the bush administration. we have seen the audits, we have seen the paper rates, we have seen the bus stop grades. we have seen the increased enforcement and in our state which is a border state, the northwest border, we have had law enforcement up in the border communities tell us that this increase in enforcement is hurting their ability to protect communities and enforce the laws

in our communities, local law enforcement. our state sheriffs enforcement wrote a letter to president obama saying we need to change this. we need to put enforcement dollars in protecting communities and ensuring our immigrant communities are actually able to work with law enforcement and actually provide them with all the information they need to effect real stoppage of real crimes that are going on. >> how can you hold secretary napolitano accountable on this and as she the proper base because she is directing the administration's work and helping shape the bill. how much confidence do you have in her? >> i think we are expecting results. we are expecting results on comprehensive immigration reform, whether it is janet napolitano or anybody else. this is the person who is in

charge and has been charged with making it happen. [inaudible] >> secretary napolitano reports to president obama as i and her stand the way the administration work so it is president obama as leader in chief, chief commander commander-- and cheap to tell secretary napolitano that these measures are not acceptable for his administration and that is what we are calling on, so yes, we don't like what secretary napolitano has done and we have told her that in meetings that she and others in the ministries in nets held across the country and our states. but it is president obama who is the commander-in-chief and who is the leader of this administration and he needs to tell her that and he needs to make the changes happen. >> this concludes our press conference. i thank all of you for joining us today and have a wonderful day. [applause]

[inaudible conversations]

>> and now environmental protection agency administrator lisa jackson on her agencies work over the past year including the regulation of carbon emissions under the clean air act. from the national press club, this is about an hour. >> that afternoon and welcome to the national press club. my name is allen and i am a reporter for bloomberg news and president of the national press club. where the world's leading professional organization for journalists and are committed to our profession's future for our

programming and by fostering free press worldwide. noting today speaker we also purchase wind power to meet 100% of our energy needs. for more information about the national press club, please use our web site at www.press.org to donate to our programs please visit www.press.org/library. on behalf of our members worldwide i would like to welcome her speaker and attendee said today's event which includes guest of the speaker as well as working journalist. i would like to welcome our c-span and public radio audiences. after the speech concludes i will ask as many questions as time permits. i would now like tragedies to deduce her head table guests. from your right, that bd administrator for the epa. neal roland of automotive roland of automotive news, diana, washington correspondent for the milwaukee journal sentinel, cam, environment reporter for bloomberg news, rod, editor at

platts. andrew schneider associate editor for kiplinger washington and chairman of the press club speakers committee. skipping over speaker we have alison fitzgeraldcome investigate of reporter for bloomberg news in the speaker committee member who organized today's event. daren't same jamison senior reporter for environment and energy publishing. herb jackson of the record in new jersey and-- of clean skies news. are speaker today is it's at the is epicenter of a lot of interesting issues that today's washington. epa administrator lisa jackson who in december declared greenhouse gas emissions a threat to the public welfare is being criticized by senators and congressman from both parties and is being sued by at least three states. she is at the center of the debate between those who think the government should require businesses to cut global warming emissions in those who say such a move would harm an r-rated fragile economy. senator jay rockefeller in several democrats are asking her

to wait two years before regulating carbon emissions they say will harm their coal-producing states. republican senators led by lisa murkowski of alaska want to go even further and stop her from ever regulating such emissions. the governors of texas, virginia and alabama meanwhile have all sued her claiming her plans will kill jobs. in response, ms. jackson has agreed to delay regulating carbon emissions until the end of the year. still she claims to go ahead by next month as congress has failed to create a cap-and-trade program to cut global warming emissions. global warming isn't her only issue of course. in her first year at epa ms. jackson's agencies at the new smog rules and 35 years and is now reviewing the rules of governing chemical use in consumer products for the first time in three decades. she said to finalize next month new miles per gallon rules on cars and she finalized rules to cut cargo ship pollution by 80%.

jackson is the first african-american to serve as epa administrator. before leading epa she was chief of staff to governor john corzine and commissioner of that state's department of environmental protection. please welcome to the national press club the epa administrator, lisa jackson. [applause] >> thank so much for that provocative introduction. [laughter] and good afternoon everyone. i have to admit to being a little bit sleep deprived this afternoon. like a lot of you, i was up watching the oscars last night. if any of you am i twitter feed you know i predicted avatar to win best picture so i missed the mark on that one a little bit. even if the movie with amber and mental vestige did not win, i

was so proud to see best picture go to the movie with a woman director. today i am happy to have a chance to bring you the best of both of those two experiences for our speech today. as i get into my speech i ask you to remember that the movie with the environmental message has actually made a lot of money. [laughter] i truly am grateful for the opportunity to speak about how the good people at the emperor mental protection agency had been making history. we have restored their rightful place of science is the first factor in all of our decisions. we have developed and implemented rules that will protect children, keep people healthy and safe lives and we have taken long overdue action on climate change including a revolutionary clean cars program builds on the historic finding that greenhouse gas pollution endangers public health and welfare. now, on that last point, the overwhelming scientific evidence was recently met with arguments

that washington d.c. experienced an unprecedented lizard and record snowfall this winter. as if an unexpected change in our climate somehow disproves climate change. today, i want to talk about a misconception that threatens to do more harm to our progress as a nation than they climate science. that is the misconception that we must make a choice between cleaning up our environment and our growing economy. i have worked in environmental protection for 20 years. i have seen meaningful environmental efforts met time and again with predictions of lost jobs and revenue. lobbyists and business journals have done such a good job of integrating it into our way of thinking that many of us believe sadly that we must choose between our economy and our environment. the people in my line of four cabins on the best job of communicating our side of this debate. we have lost the messaging war and we have to work to present the alternative.

but it helps that history and the facts bear out. i'm here to show you today the choice between the environment and the economy isn't a false choice. well conceived, effectively implemented environmental protection is good for economic growth. let me repeat that. environmental protection is good for economic growth. don't get me wrong. environmental regulations are not free, but the money that is an investment in our country and one that pays for itself. first, environment of protection makes us healthier. eliminates contributors to costly and often deadly diseases like asthma cancer and heart disease. my and the sun is one of 23 million americans with asthma i know the financial and emotional burden of hospital visits and doctors appointments. when the air is dirty or the water is contaminated and people are getting sick those kinds of help calls are multiplied by

millions of families and they are burdened to small businesses trying to provide health care to their workers. good environmental protection is critical to our health and because of that it is critical to our economy. second, environmental protection makes our communities more prosperous and their workforce more productive. those of you with kids in college will understand the words of a man who said to me, business is common to communities like students to college is. they look at the people to make sure they are getting what they need to drive. they want to know that this place means a better future and they don't put their money down if they don't like what they see. this is something we see all the time in our ongoing work on environment of justice. the idea that environmental degradation is an obstacle to economic prosperity is a killer of the environmental justice movement and in the place where new jobs are needed the most,

environmental degradation is an entry barrier for new investments in businesses. is what we see in inner cities where air pollution makes kids miss school and work or stay home. is what we see on tribal lands were open land fields are rampant and tricky waters pollutant. earlier this year i met with a tribal leader who told me his community was facing 50% unemployment. is what we see in greenville, mississippi having trouble attracting jobs because their water come even though it meets federal safety standards, is brown in color. poison in the ground means poison in the economy. a week weakened varmints means a weak consumer base and an unhealthy air means unhealthy atmosphere for investment. but a clean, green healthy community is a better place to raise a family. is more competitive than the race to attract new businesses and it has the foundation it needs for prosperity. these are two reasons why our environment is essential to our

economy. but what i want to focus on today is the vital role environmentalism plays for a critical driver for economic success. our capacity for innovation and invention. just yesterday, thomas friedman wrote america still has the best innovation culture in the world. he immediately followed that by saying, but we need better policies to nurture it. this is what smart and bar mental protection does. it creates a need. in other words a market for clean technology and bennett then it dries and drives innovation and invention. in other words new products for that market. this is our convenience. smart environmental protection creates jobs. now that might be a difficult idea for some folks to handle. so before i go any further, let me lay out some common ground. everyone wants a clean environment. 10 out of 10 republicans surveyed want clean-- 10 out of

10-amp democrats think safe water is important. ask all 20 and they would actually agree. as the "boston globe" editorial put it last week even antigovernment protesters know it is no fun having a tea party with contaminated water. [laughter] i received as many letters from red states as they do from blue states, from new bedford massachusetts to tar creek oklahoma. last year an amendment for epa to locate residents away from lead pollution was sponsored by republican senators brownback, roberts and my good friend senator james inhofe. senator roberts called it one of the rare instances of true bipartisan support. oftentimes, the same office as blasting our our press releases on the overreach of baseless epa bureaucrats are also asking the same bureaucrats for help. that is a textbook example of irony and it is all too evident in today's politics.

when it comes to people's health everyone wants strong environmental protection. everyone also wants a strong economy. we all want robust job growth or go no one favors higher cost for starting businesses or manufacturing products. i have two teenage sons, which means i buy a lot of stuff. i am an active american consumer in the last thing i want to see our higher prices for food or utility bills or shoes, or close. so we all want a clean environment and we all want a strong economy. what you may not realize is we have all seen proof that we can have both. in the last 30 years emissions of six dangerous air pollution that cause smog, acid rain, lead poisoning and more decreased 54%. at the exact same time, gross domestic product grew by 126%. that means we have made huge

reductions in air pollution at the same time more cars when on the road, more power plants went on line and more buildings went up. .. environmental technology industry. by conservative estimates in 2007, environmental firms and small businesses in the u.s. generated $282 billion in revenues and $40 billion in exports. supported 1.6 million american jobs. and that number does on include all the engineers and professional services firms to support those businesses. take for example new jersey's corporation which landed commercial production of the catalytic converter.

if you drove here today, your car had a catalytic converter in it to burn unleaded gasoline. if you drove here today your car had a catalytic converter to burn unleaded gasoline. today those things are standard, but 30 years ago when the epa used the clean air act to fees and unleaded gas in catalytic converters they were extremely controversy. many automakers oppose them. the chamber of commerce claimed and i quote, the tire industry is might collapse. using the clean air act in this way was said to be poison pill for our economy. something that sounds too familiar around washington today. yet the auto industry survived. a dangerous lead pollution and other air is 92% lower than it was in 1983 by 1985 the reduction had estimated health benefits of $17 billion per year. the initial cost of a rule was paid ten to 13 times over.

and in 2006, the ankle hard corporation was bought for $5 billion. that is just one good example of how it works. new environmental rules lead to new innovations which led to new jobs. those of you too young to remember the switch to catalytic converters may remember the phase-out of the ozone depleting cfcs. they were the chemicals in aerosol cans and other products that led to a growing hole in the ozone layer. i remember a lot of people wondering if they were going to have to give up hair spray or their dod and not being too happy about it and they were not the only on happy ones. the chemical industry predicted severe economic disruption. refrigeration company's forecast of shutdowns of supermarket coolers and machines used to cool office buildings, hotels and hospitals. companies that use the manufacturing believe the transition would be next to impossible. the doom and destruction came to

pass. refrigerators and air conditioners stayed on. when innovators took up the manufacturing challenge the felt alternatives toward better. some develop new technology that cut costs while improving productivity and quality and by making the product better and cleaner the american refrigeration industry actually gained access to overseas opportunities. these examples speak to a long history of innovation, new jobs and better health through environmental protection. yet many still claim the regulation is costly and believe scaling back is the best thing for growth. we've already seen that in action. with a fury that less regulation ought to be good for the economy was put to the test in the last administration. in that time there was no apparent benefit for businesses or consumers. prices on most products went up

and cost of the tool increased astronomically. any savings that the of the unexpected for businesses certainly didn't translate into higher wages for american workers. in fact the health impact for millions of americans suffering from asthma, cancer and heart disease coupled with steady rise of health insurance cost created yet another level of expenses for families and businesses. today we are slowly but surely pulling up and out of the economic downturn. but many of our communities don't have with the need to rebuild. it's no accident so much of the recovery act is focused and no wonder so much of it is based on free energy innovation. the wind and solar and smart grid investments that have been made in the last year. but clean energy and community cleanup jobs in the recovery actor just the beginning. the question we face now is what can we at the epa do to protect our environment, strengthen our

communities and foster prosperity. one of the clear answers is abandoning the old disputes working in partnership on her new innovations. partnerships like the clean car program which took shape when president obama brought together auto makers, although workers, governors from across the country and environmental advocates to craft a historic agreement, clean car standards will mean 950 million tons of carbon pollution cut from the skies. $3,000 in savings for drivers of clean cars and $2.3 billion that can stay at home in our economy rather than buying oil from overseas. it will also mean a new innovation. american science can stand up to produce new composite materials that make cars lighter, safer and more fuel efficient. our inventors and entrepreneurs can take the lead in advanced

battery technology for plug and hybrids and electric cars and in the factors across the country can produce the new components they can sell to auto makers in the u.s. and around the globe. new environmental protections, new innovations means new jobs. this is the direction we are moving in 2010 as well. epa is already proposing new small productions and finalized the first standard in 35 years. we are developing pollution standards that we know will foster innovation and a working in partnership with utility companies to figure out how we can get there. we are boosting production and use of that financed biofuels to double the use of renewables and break dependence on foreign oil. that will benefit the communities, spark new demand and with clarity of where the regulation stands proud investments in research to expand effectiveness and the use of renewable biofuels and of

course we will continue to face down our climate crisis and move into the clean energy future. we are running into the same tired arguments. once again industry and lobbyists are trying to convince us change will be absolutely impossible. once again alarmists are claiming this will be the death knell of the economy. once again they're telling us we have to choose economy or environment. most drastically we are seeing efforts to further delay the epa action to reduce greenhouse gases. this is happening despite the overwhelming science on the danger of climate change, despite the supreme court's 2007 decision that epa must use the clean air act to reduce the present threat of quote greenhouse gases, and despite the fact that leaving this problem for our children to solve is an act of breathtaking

negligence. supposedly these efforts have been put forth to protect jobs. in reality they will have negative economic effects. the clean car program could be put on hold leaving american auto makers once again facing a patchwork of state standards without a clear picture of greenhouse gas regulations that will be little incentive to invest in a clean energy jobs. america will fall are further behind the international competitors in the race for clean energy innovation. finally, the economic cost on to climate change will be orders of magnitude higher for the next generation than it would be for us to take action today. i can't in good conscience support any measure that has is that burden on to my sons or their children. i find it hard to believe any parent can say to their child we are going to wait to act. this debate has and argue for something of the american people

and many businesses have already decided on. recent years have seen a growing grass root, its environmental laws and that is directly tied to our economy. informed consumers are demanding more of their products. business leaders are recognizing cost savings potential of energy efficiency and sustainability and they are putting serious money into innovation. this is a grass-roots environmental movement of that votes with its dollars. seven of ten consumers say they will choose brands doing good things for people and of the planet. 74% believe our companies should do more to protect the planet and more than half of americans will look for an environmentally friendly products in the next purchase. these changes are happening and not on the margins of our economy. wal-mart, the largest retailer in the world set goals to use 100% renewable energy to create

zero waste and save healthy sustainable products. two weeks ago the announced plan to cut 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions across the life cycle of their products in the next five years. they made the announcement over webcast of all places on treehugger.com treen gambled that produces products that touch 3 billion people per day is planning an announcement next week encouraging their brands to shrink their environmental footprint. a general mills factory of minnesota is recycling their serial for biofuel saving $500,000 fuel costs in the process. the appropriately named green giant is reducing pesticides and chemical water pollution with sustainable farming. these are companies we know and use. timberland, mikey, best buy, starbucks, and they are responding to the consumer demand. consumers want to know their

products don't have hidden health and environmental costs. companies must respond to parents who refuse to buy baby bottles with bpa or that have dangerous chemicals into their drinking water. industry can try to ignore the epa but i know and they know they resist the forces of the green marketplace at their peril. it's time to put the rest economic growth and environmental protection are incompatible. it's time to finally dismiss this false choice. we need a new approach. when the police to america's greatest strengths of ingenuity, innovation. we need to reclaim their leadership and the development of new products that protect our health and our environment and we need to capitalize on the growing green marketplace here and around the world. that approach would be the return to basics which is appropriate for the epa in 2010 because this year marks the epa

for the anniversary. when the epa began 40 years ago the first administrator well as some locals house wrote the technology which has bulldozed its way across the environment must now be employed to remove impurities from the air to restore vitality to the rivers and streams to recycle waste that is the ugly byproduct of our prosperity. that is just as true now as it was then the three weekend retreat for a rapidly industrialized planet in the global economy. we must integrate a passion first to rush into the global rush towards economic growth. on the same token the laissez-faire anti-government crowd must understand that ever expanding economic opportunity is not possible without sustainability. without protection for the water and air and land people depend on we can only go so far. without clean energy the global economy would be running on empty within our lifetimes.

it's time to stop denying that obvious truth, stop fleeing on the politics of deily and denial and start thinking broadly about what is going to help us move forward together which brings me to my final point. another piece of common ground we all share. we are all counting on the ingenuity and creativity of the american people. now i'm done with false choice between the economy and the environment. i want an epa that is a leader in innovation to protect our health and environment and expand opportunities. i'm not interested in leading an agency that only tells us what we can't do. i want to work together on all of the things we can do. this is about rising to meet our most urgent environmental and economic challenges, not shrinking from them with the excuse that it's too hard. it's never been a good enough answer for the american people.

no point in history has any problem been solved by waiting another year to act or burying our heads in the sand. progress is made by seeing in our greatest challenges of the possibilities for building a healthy more prosperous future and bringing the best we have to offer to the table. it's what we've done before. it's what we have to do again today. it's not something we can leave for tomorrow. i want to thank you very much. and i'm happy to take some questions. [applause] [applause] >> thank you for your time, administrator jackson. astor is no surprise there are numerous questions dealing with climate change, and the first question if he will step up here and we will address the

audience. christine todd whitman was on c-span this morning and was saying the climate change debate is so politicized the argument for legislation should be entirely about clean air and not about climate change. are you concerned recent controversy about climate change science will hurt chances for legislation this year and do you think that the climate message needs to be downplayed in favor of clean air? >> as head of the environment protection agency by not to be in favor of not giving the best science we can to the american people. the science is absolutely crystal clear. there is an organized effort to slow down in people's minds and some indication that it may be working on some level. but as the head of the epa to have to continue to stand here and make it crystal clear the science is not on settled. we do know our emissions of greenhouse gases are accumulating in our atmosphere and interfering with the way the atmosphere is supposed to work. what it's doing is changing our

climate, and it means catastrophic problems going forward. so no, i can't as the head of the epa. certainly legislators are going to do with legislators to and politicians are going to do what is necessary to make progress but what i hope as we all keep our eye on the ball which is to transition to clean energy. >> given the p.a. knowledge of the science and priorities why hasn't the administration said legislative principles to capitol hill regarding its preferred approach on climate change? >> i don't think there has been a bigger cheerleader for transition to clean energy and need for comprehensive clean energy legislation than president obama. i join him several times and will do again today saying that we need congress to act. we've seen the u.s. house of representatives act so now we are waiting on the u.s. senate and the hope has been all along the continuing efforts in the

u.s. senate and of continuing going on as we speak here today will result in legislation that can pass the house and in a bill the president can sign. >> is cap-and-trade the necessary system to slow climate change or with a carbon tax or other methods work as well or better? >> that's a trick question. the truth of the matter is of course people have varying ideas on how best to deal with climate change and also how best to use the marketplace. my speech was about the marketplace to incentivize the move to clean energy. we know right now between lawsuits that exist today, they exist right now. forget the epa and the fact there is no price on carbon that is essentially free to put as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as you want the there is a chilling on the investment that needs to happen and clean energy technologies. the recovery act put a lot of

public money into the clean energy technologies but this will not take off. the kind of innovation i spoke about won't happen if we don't see private financing follow so why do think there are other ways to put a price on carbon. clearly the president talked a lot about the ease with which the cap-and-trade program fits into our economy but i know those discussions continue. >> on the topic of market-oriented mechanisms your agency budget for fiscal year 2011 says the epa wants to examine this for cutting the greenhouse gases. some have taken that to mean the agency might pursue carpentry prince for some industries is the legislation for cap-and-trade for the whole economy can't get through congress. would the epa forge ahead with carbon trading if congress doesn't pass the cap-and-trade bill? >> first i refuse to speculate because i believe the congress will step up to the challenge hopefully sooner rather than later. i think people are over reading a little bit of our budget language. epa has a history of relying on market-based incentives in our

regulation as it is and i don't think you should read into that that we have some plan folks don't know about to enforce a cap-and-trade regime. we don't at all but what i have been strong about and i think that you heard in this speech the ability of the clean air act to be used reasonably and sensibly to help move markets, to help drive innovation to bring help the transition to a clean energy economy, and i've gone further and said the clean air act and its use right now can be entirely consistent with legislation to come. there's no reason we can't do that and keep in on what's happening on the legislative front and make sure we don't get to a place [inaudible] >> falling on the statement that cap-and-trade or carvin legislation will these past sooner rather of literalists savings up being a leader than say 2010. what a sector specific bill for in areas such as utilities be possible this year?

>> there are all kinds of -- i'm sure the questioner knows all kinds of alternative plans folks are talking about now. i think there's one principle we need to keep in mind. energy does touch our entire economy in some way and because so much of our energy is fossil fuel based that means as we move to the corrine forms of energy we are going to have to touch practically all of our economies so think it's great to be important as people look at all of these alternatives to realize when you move away the more you will move away from an economy wide approach although you can make some progress you again lose opportunities to really harness private-sector investment to look at approaches the car when win on all sides and i think that is the one issue i know we have to deal with when you start to narrow things. >> final question on climate legislation for at least a bit because i know questions are still coming. there is a discussion that senator kerry and gramm made release a bill of next week. how quickly could epa have an

economic analysis completed? >> all right, who is here from senator kerry's office? [laughter] one of the strengths is a an incredible staff of the folks who have worked for years on what are generally thought to be state-of-the-art models. we model every regulation we put in place and we do it to look up the impact on the economy. my argument is we've never looked at all the benefits to the economy but the modeling takes six to eight weeks because the models are interrelated and quite complex so from the time now that we get legislation but that we get something that has specifications to model it takes easily six weeks. >> several months ago the epa postponed a decision on an ethanol weaver to raise to 50% but said a final decision would likely be made in mid march which is next week. since we are about their do you care to make news on this issue

today? are you still expecting a final ruling in march? >> i'm sorry but i've got to back up a little bit. epa has already made final rules that really encourage the next generation of biofuels and grandfathers the current supply of ethanol, corn-based ethanol made in this country. it's been a big issue and one of concern to people of rural america. they were afraid they would lose the industry to the waiver issue is different. it's how much ethanol can be in gasoline then you put it a variety of applications on cars and also other engines and it depends on testing. i have said that testing needs to be complete because we don't want to find out that ethanol blend has any on known efforts consequences. that's not good for effable or its future and it's certainly not good for the consumers. the testing will be done march or april in conjunction with

department of energy and we will make decisions after that. >> the u.s. auto industry has been given the merkel fuel economy targets to meet for new cars and trucks but new modified power plants oil refineries and other stationary sources have been told they need to use the best available technology to control emissions. what is the best available technology going to be? to to give specific examples of the technologies the new or modified power plant would use to comply with epa rules? >> now somebody knows i'm an engineer by training. it's hard as an engineer not to talk about technology all the time. i believe technology is key to the challenge of pollution just like every of the challenge. theater thing about technology is it is especially in this space rapidly evolving. i think the best available control, technology group rick comes from the clean air act that was forcing -- but foresaw

the need to constantly be ratcheting standards depending where best available control technology is. i'm not going to make news what technologies are best for dealing with carvin today but you heard about a range of those and president obama has put me as the co-chair in terms of task force to look at the carvin capture and sequestration technologies the idea would need to be to capture carbon dioxide pollution and put it somewhere where i won't enter our atmosphere. >> how do you respond to republicans such as senator inhofe and sensenbrenner who said without strong moves by china and india to curb global warming to the united states would be harmed economically? >> first i would ask them to read my speech. i really think that we are missing an opportunity if we don't realize that the technologies that are going to be used to move us into cleaner energy, were carbon, less water, all those technologies will be imported not just here but to the world so i would say there

is no reason to wait for china and india to act if we truly believe that there is a recent environmental and economic to act now. in fact there is every reason not to wait. there's every reason to move forward as expeditiously as we can so we don't see what seems to be happening continue which is that we innovate, we invent and goes overseas to be manufactured and used because there is no market for it here. >> how do you respond what audiences overseas will say about a climate that that the rich countries such as u.s. and european union cause global warming and should have to foot most of the bill? >> certainly there are arguments about how on an international stage to really attack problem like climate change, and i think those discussions will continue. i don't have a specific answer of the concerns climate that

raises but you can understand the underlying concern a which is when you're talking about developed countries and the nation's trillion to develop you can understand the equities and the needs of the nation's to try to develop in a way that gives first and foremost citizens access to energy. probably something we take for granted in this country every day. the ideal of course is that as those countries develop a developing a way that jumps over dirty energy and moves to clean forms of energy so that as they are growing and i think technical assistance is a wonderful way to help to ensure that. the epa has been doing a lot of that work and other parts of the government as they develop we can avoid some of the problems and some of the issues we are now having to deal with in retrospect. >> you recently announced a review of the fools surrounding chemicals and consumer products. do you plan to require companies to disclose the public research showing the chemicals used in their products are safe?

>> i think the good news is consumers are demanding to know what's in the products they buy and more and more that kind of right to know based on the old right to know legislation which has been so powerful for environmental protection as a whole is foremost in their minds and companies see that. my speech talked about the need for companies to prove to consumers the ultimate in users and not just individual consumers but even corporate consumers that the products they are buying are safe and sustainable. i believe we are literally on the brink of finally modernizing the chemical safety laws for this country and when you think about the fact they are 30-years-old and think about the fact that they have been widely perceived not just by epa but industry as well is toothless. i think we owe it to the american people to answer their increasing concerns and plea for help and certainly for me as a

mom, as a consumer it's one of my seven top priorities. >> you long said it will mature decisions based on sound science and law. how do you make decisions when the science is on certain? >> the signs on climate change is not on certain but there are pieces of science that are uncertain and as a scientist, as an engineer i have great faith and comfort level with the idea of peer review, independent peer review. i call for it all the time. you could talk to my staff and first thing i will ask where is the data from and has it been reviewed because as we learn more and more, as our instruments good for it more sensitive and we'll learn about chemicals we never knew existed a by-product process these we never mentioned before we have to. we owe it to the american people not to take that information and submit for the worst but to test and rigorously studied and then we also allow it to them that we

some of all that we know and in a timely manner not years from now when it's too late when they've already been potentially exposed to give them the best information they have and that's what we are insisting on everyday at epa. skim interagency makes decisions every day that affect every american which means communication is vital three on a scale of a through f how would you grade the epa communication effectiveness and how would you improve it? >> i think my communications stafford here in the audience -- great job. [laughter] i don't want him to get complacent so i will say strong b+. no, that's not fair at all. epa has to sometimes step back and realize the epa is an iceberg. about 90% of what we do as an agency is under the waterline, really invisible to the average american. but the 10% above the line is the 10% that says there is a

place in the federal government that has one mission, that's clean air, clean water, safe products. that part of the mission i think we sometimes take for granted and probably there's no challenge greater as we look at our mission to make sure people don't think that because we have an epa i don't have to worry about. we are rapidly reaching the point epa cannot do it without citizens taking action in their own lives. we can talk about cleaner cars but what will make this go is consumers who purchase them. so i think it's very important we not only continue to expand our conversation and not just environmentalists but people of all backgrounds and walks of life who don't think of themselves as environmentalists but make it clear just because the epa is here or i met the epa that they don't have a job to do as well.

>> how does one involve more stickers don't public-interest groups and industry groups and the discussion on epa? >> i think that question is a recognition or nod towards the fact one of our another of the seven priorities this year is expanding the conversation of environmentalism and working for environmental justice. expanding the conversation is a mouthful. it means who do you talk to and what you say to them? i have a staff member who tells a story about how every year his grandfather would get as it started to get cold and plastic sheeting over her windows and i always tease him i'm sure she didn't call herself part of president obama said weatherization task force or to transform to clean energy but she does it affect her utility bill and it made a difference in her quality-of-life. she is helping our agenda on clean energy and energy efficiency so we have to move to communities and consumers and help state governments and local

governments speak to those people, to speak to all people and especially interested in speaking to people of color because i think there's a myth out there sometimes true but not always that we have other things to worry about as communities of color, and by man african-american woman who grew up in the south in new orleans, and for me i didn't come to the environmental movement because of its beauty. i came because i believe we have to fight pollution as prosperous as we are as a country we have to insist on clean air and clean water and clean and land. >> do you see offshore trawling as part of a smart climate change strategy? >> the president has called for by understand and agree with his belief the energy strategy has to be varied and should include offshore drilling when can be done in a way that is protective of the environment. i also think it's important to remember he's also called for other forms of offshore energy

and i come from new jersey a state that has embraced the idea of offshore wind power as part of what it would like to see as its offshore energy mix of the future so i think the conversation about asking communities to think again about resources that it might have as well as energy efficiency cutting down on how much energy you use in the first place is important. >> the epa will be listed late december identify the chemicals would face strict labeling and reporting requirements. why was bpa not one of them? does this mean the agency will regulate the chemical? >> i will answer the second question first. bpa is commonly used in plasticizers and it's used very commonly in many consumer products. bpa is planning to finalize an action plan in the near future so there are folks worried about whether or not we backed away from it shouldn't be worried at

all but the bigger news this year was the fda change in its regard for the chemical. i don't remember the actual bureaucratic term but essentially we are at a place our government is saying there is concern and it's starting to do the work to determine the level of the conservatives even going far enough to say to consumers in the meantime here's how to minimize the chances bpa will end up and the water you drink or that you might consume in your body's we estimate how deeply into stricter permitting for test site actions under the universal epa? >> these are pretty good questions. the sixth circuit ruling on the national council basically says that you need a permit to apply the pesticides that have any shot of running of the land and

ending up in water so often times in agriculture we used pesticides. they are not meant to end up in water but they can end up in water and that case is about the fact people especially need to have the right to know those pesticides are being applied and the rate at which they are applied so it tells them the need a permit. that is a huge undertaking and it's one we are digging in partnership with u.s. department of agriculture and many state agriculture agencies you can rest assured the permit when it goes out because so many people of america are concerned about it will be out for comment and will be done in a way that i think shows we are building on programs already out there as we comply with of the court ruling. >> reducing emissions from large ocean ships could cut carn dioxide emissions dramatically. will the epa regulates pollutants from ships that enter the u.s. ports?

>> we've already taken i think historic steps on oceangoing vessels. there's a couple things to remember. that work has to be done in conjunction with international maritime community. so we could probably regulate 3 miles or 10 miles or something of shore. many states have said that but comprehensive legislation will come from regulating the ship's engines in a way that we change the fleet overtime to a cleaner and more efficient fleet. the real success story with oceangoing vessels has been around particular pollution. our science has shown if you reduce the sulphur content of the fuel is burned in the ship's 100 miles offshore you will have impact three if you do it in california all the way to kansas in terms of air quality you will see improved air quality from a simple step like that. that's up right now in front of the international maritime organization for approval.

epa is proud to work with the coast guard and our partners in canada to insist on probably the most stringent -- had it not been for the united states effort to insist on stringent standards for the current oil burned in the ships we wouldn't see the change so we are certainly happy to continue that kind of thinking as we move forward. >> how would you characterize the progress of the super fund site cleanup and what is your strategy for dealing with more difficult sites such as large mining sites? >> superfund is chugging along. the president's fy 2011 budget includes $1.3 billion budget request for cleaning up sites. that's right on par, just tiny bit under last year's amount but it continues the call. president obama's call for the reinstatement of tax on chemical feedstocks that support the

superfund. certainly i don't think there's any argument that we have these mega sites with a be mining sites or others that require an incredible amount of work to clean up. we just listed the canal of new york city for a simple, and while we are really proud of the fact that we are at dewitt in the program we are listing the site makes us optimistic that all parties are going to get it cleaned up its going to be a very expensive undertaking. so i think more money for the program the decade so that those who need to do the cleanups' know that the government has money to step in as a very good thing and i think we will continue to not only work on the superfund but there's an increase in the president's proposal for brown field sites. many communities are lucky not to have a major superfund site but they have these little brown field sites. these old dilapidated places that since closed down and figure standing in the way of

economic growth. there's more money in the budget because we recognize a little bit of the seed money from the public sector can on what private investment in those sites. >> and other mining question. but a bp plans for addressing mountaintop removal mining and its environmental impacts during 2010? how likely is it the epa will succeed toughening of the mining regulations? >> the epa is currently in the process of reviewing the mountain top mining permits that have been held through years and years almost decades would be a fair way to see it of litigation. this is a practice that is quite emotional for many people in america. its -- there are fan seems of coal above mountaintops i guess above in appalachia, exclusively in appalachia and the progress that is most cost efficient is to blow off the top, level it, removed and then all that

trouble from the top of the mountain gets put into valleys and almost inevitably fills streams. what we're finding that the epa is the process of filling the streams has a determined to win back on water quality and as you might expect the more you fill the more likely you will see problems with water quality. i'm proud of the fact epa step forward and said we are going to review each and every one of these permits to try to minimize if not in the in the environmental degradation. epa doesn't regulate mining. we fight for clean water under the clean water act so our role is limited to ensure that these projects if they are approved do not have a detrimental impact on clean water and we will continue to do that and i have promised senator byrd we would guidance r those companies who have permits

in the process. there will be happening shortly. >> will the epa be moving forward with a low carbon fuel standard under its authority under the supreme court decision in the epa versus massachusetts? >> now i'm wondering if the questions are coming from my staff. [laughter] i don't know. i think several states, low carbon fuel standard the idea is state's most recently i think california but other states talked about it as well will simply ask that fuels' get if you will less carbon intense overtime and biofuels and advanced by officials are part of the picture as well so we will continue to of discussions in many cases they are led by the states but we will continue to have discussions about the right way to move to lower carbon. >> meeting the to the broad question do you worry in the current fiscal climate state budget cuts will lead to the

inability to enforce clean air and water acts? >> as a former state commissioner my most recent job was the head of the new jersey department of environmental protection, a detour with governor course i am now find myself here and of course i worry. i know state budgets all over the country are being squeezed and what's happening in new jersey and i would simply say this to the nation's governor as they make those hard choices, clean air, clean water, the people that work on those programs in the state are incredibly important and here is better news the president's budget includes money, more money than they've ever seen to support them. so it's not a good place to cut because you are turning down federal funding for the people who go out and write the permits that businesses will need if they want to expand or go out and enforce the regulations of citizens call with a concern so of course i worry.

i certainly wouldn't in see any governor with a tough job of producing a balanced budget but we heard that loud and clear from the states and it's why this year the epa budget has more money than ever for state support. >> we are almost out of time before asking the west was to be habitable important matters to take care of. first to remind the audience of the future speakers marchant tomorrow investor ron kirk the u.s. trade representative who will discuss the obama administration's trade agenda. march 15th a week from today we have armey the chairman of the freedom works and april 5th douglas shulman the commissioner of the internal revenue service will be speaking as the clock ticks on your tax returns. for the second item, the moment we've all been waiting for i would like to present a guest with the traditional and coveted national press club mog. [laughter] >> i'm going to have to check with officials on such -- lester chris too regardless whether you

can accept we thank you for coming today. i would also like to thank the national press club staff including its library and broadcast center for organizing today's event. our last question is in the program the simpsons the environmental protection agency is portrayed as an agency with no fewer controversies than the ones today. what you're epa consider putting a dome over the city of springfield as in the simpsons and what is your feeling toward the portrayal of the agency on the television program now in its 20th year? [laughter] >> first i love the simpsons let me say that and lisa some said rocks. [laughter] when i first came in last april's recycle all of my managers together, but small band we were back then and told them we had a serious meeting and we watched the simpsons and we did because some had never

seen it but also because your and epa employee it hurts to see that in agency, the american people lescol to the point they lost trust and agency that the agency could be corrupted enough if you will to think of an ideal like domain of the city as a way of protecting the environment. epa is on the job and we challenge ourselves over the past year to make sure we earn the trust of the american people. i hope we are doing that and i cannot think of a better job to have sown now we are not going to do it to do springfield wherever you might become a springfield out there and as i am fond of pointing out no matter what you think of the clean air act air is all of ours so it is just as important to your state has nine that we all pitch in to keep it clean and healthy. thanks. [applause] >> thank you.

es the air is filled with the springfield relief remember for more information about joining the national press club and how to acquire a copy of today's program, please go to our website at www.press.org. thank you for being here today and for viewing and listening to this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] next the former head of the epa and bush had been a station christie todd whitman. she now works for a the group that promotes nuclear energy. from this morning's washington journal this is 40 minutes.

>> host: former environmental protection agency administrator under the bush administration and governor of new jersey christine todd whitman this morning to talk about nuclear energy and your role as the co-chair of the clean and safe energy coalition. two things in the last couple of weeks the president announcing federal loan guarantees for the southern company to build the first nuclear reactor of the united states in some 40 years i believe and also the administration's announcement is initially that yucca mountain will be closed, would be a nuclear waste storage facility. titles together. how is this going to work? >> guest: the two things are integral to one another but they are not in separable and right now the spent nuclear rods are stored on-site and most of them have been reeling since now another 30 years, so within that timeframe this country if we are serious about getting into the nuclear at 20% of the power

today as it is today in the future where in the coming energy demand by 2030 increase in demand we are going to have to bring new nuclear reactors on line but right now we are also going to get into the reprocessing if we are serious about bringing the clear which is recycling and you can docilely reduce the amount of power left on the rods very much reducing the amount stored anywhere. we will come up with a place to store. that is what the administration is trying to do more now. sick to reach yoo appointed a panel. what should we get into the reprocessing business? what should we do with spent rods? it's the congress that called for the single place to put the nuclear rods. but my point is those two things one should not be a mediator of the others in four words you can use the spent rods on site until we figure out what we're doing with spent fuel the the congress

said there should be one repository and the name yucca mountain so they have to take the next step and make the decision is it going to be one or two or three or are you going to leave them on sight. >> guest: >> host: would you know of the policy in terms of nuclear beyond what they've done here with the federal loan guarantees for the reactors and georgia? >> guest: in granting these what they're doing is saying we are serious nuclear should be part of the future. they're looking at the broad picture a 23% increase by 2030 to, they're looking at commitments to climate change, clean air in general and the fact nuclear is the only base cover that releases one of those regulated pollutants or greenhouse gases while producing power and it's a base power so it's always on and there so while they are still going to be putting their money as they should and interesting forms of green power in the renewables as well as conservation they say if we are going to meet the increase in demand by 2030 that's not far away we have to

start today fear going to meet the demand without running into a situation where we have blackouts and that is not acceptable to anybody. >> host: you are the co-chair of the coalition. who's behind this organization? >> guest: its nuclear. >> host: businesses and individuals? >> guest: it is a volunteer organization queen save energy and it is made up of people who individuals we of labor unions, some environmental groups, we have some health groups, we as individuals elected officials from around the country over 2200 members both individual and organization members so it's a grassroots movement. mike co-chairs dr. patrick more one of the founders of greenpeace and he is impeccable credentials and is a scientist and what patrick is saying is look i care about climate change and clean air and keeping the economy going. it's not a zero sum game or a relative to the environment.

i think this needs to be part of our future so what he's trying to do is get the facts out there. nuclear is not a silver or gold or the answer for everybody. communities have questions to ask when utility is proposing bringing in a clear and cases providing some of those facts and figures. >> host: what sort of jobs figures to you see for the nuclear energy the next five years beyond the constructions? talk about the permanent jobs. >> guest: that is one of the things what nuclear so attractive in this day with my .7% of the plan rate during the height of construction to develop to 2400 workers on a site at five or 700 full-time workers dollars will never go anywhere else once the reactor is up and running those jobs throw off over $40 million in total income to the employees and $430 million of income to the communities. for every one job that is

brought on line at a reactor to were three jobs are created in the community to support that and they pay on average about 30% more than a similar job in that community wherever they are located so the potential, there's already been some 15,000 jobs created just in the planning process getting ready for bringing on the reactors because we do have utilities now actively moving forward with siding and looking at technologies. so there's a lot going on it that makes it attractive and some good answers for people who have concerns left over from the past generation of nuclear reactors. >> host: were you surprised that ministration moved this week on the nuclear power? >> guest: not really because i think they are trying to be sensible and they say how else we meet the increase in demand because if you take the best scenario, renewables are maybe 7% if you stretch it maybe you can get naim. >> host: wind, solar -- >> host: >> guest: hydropower. so if you triple that today you

will not meet 23% increase of demand by 2013 and triple the discreet with a strain on the industry because we still haven't figured it, we will but we haven't figured out how to store the power. it's all been the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. everybody says nuclear is expensive but so is solar and wind. there are trade-offs and the administration is saying we've got to be sensible about this. >> host: christie todd whitman with us until 9:15 eastern four calls. 202-737-0001 for democrats -- 202-737-0002 for democrats, 202-737-0001 for republicans. for all others is 0205. maryland first up sander on the republican line. >> guest: >> caller: hauer dewaal de been? i always wanted to -- i'm glad obama wants to do nuclear but do we ever consider building more

oil refineries and our country so we can refine our own oil? >> guest: is an issue that is being discussed by the department of energy and by the various utilities that have the ability to do that kind of thing but as you know there's a lot of concern about where huge rell and halgand house seat is it and these are concerns were going to make bring any new technology online slow process and that is one of the things we have to deal with in this country. we are good as saying no. we don't want to drill for oil. it's between 53% of the power today. it's dirty, we don't want anymore of that, we don't want to keep importing from countries that don't like us very much, we don't want to consider nuclear, we are getting over that which is a good thing and even with renewables people say wait a minute these windmills took a lot of space and they are visual pollution to reedbirds don't look the same when they come out as they did going into them. people are concerned above geothermal so we have got to

understand there is no one answer and we have to have a mix of new power sources, built in the traditional power sources and doing a better job of conservation. >> host: kentucky michael on the democrats' line to get >> caller: hello, how are you doing today? >> host: north carolina. i made a mistake. cooperhead, michael. >> caller: i live in north carolina and worked on the epa campus and wired up all of those laboratories. i can tell you one thing right now those three years on that project i saw so much government waste. things thrown in the garbage, coming to was damaged. i had to put whites together severely damaged. but on this flip side there will be waste in all projects and it seems like the federal government when they get in to building things they just don't

take a waste or what's going to happen into consideration and i think the contractors feel as if almost it is a blank check and we cannot write blank checks nowadays to anybody. that's part of the discourse in this country, so on p.m. all for nuclear, building the new nuclear power plant but one thing and i called my censure about eight there's been severely off as you know in the treaty in the electricity trades and what have you so i put in for an added that a nuclear power plant outside of town and what struck me is just ridiculous. there are no -- on deck and, the flier whatever, no experience necessary, no background, no military background so you know, my concern is whose grin to be

watching these power plants? what are their qualifications? if this is a nuclear power plant this isn't just a pharmaceutical company or something like that. >> guest: that's a very good question because it's something the industry takes seriously not just as the regulatory commission. i can't speak with the verge of it was you were looking at you would go through a background check before you were allowed on a nuclear reactor site. they watched this very carefully and oversee it to make sure they are constantly testing the parameters of the security they have in place because they know being the utilities and regulators to oversee this that the slightest misstep could be disaster for the industry not to mention the people around so they want to catch anything like that up front and early and we've got is a security on site provided by you and utilities. they will be watching closely but you also but the regulatory

commission does spot checks and announced. they will be looking over the shoulder of any new reactor coming on line of people working on a. they're going to be highly trained. obviously if you are using over 3 million yards of concrete in the course of building a reactor however much it is, it's enormous. there are all sorts of things that go into a reactor will have waste and different contractors but they are all going to be scrutinized and what happens almost every state now where a reactor is being looked at the are required being both state and utility to take a look at least twice and hear sometimes four times a year to make sure that construction is going on as planned and the money being spent is spent the week was intended. those combined i think we can be pretty feel pretty comfortable about the future of nuclear. >> host: next up is walker louisiana james on the republican line.

>> caller: good morning. first of all i think a couple hundred new nuclear power plants would be the best stimulus plan of all but i have a question for the governor considering of the late e-mails, the reports and the revelation that the monitoring stations are being located more and more in urban areas do you believe that the signs of climate change settled? >> guest: signs of climate change have not settled over all. there will be disputes about it but from my perspective as far as nuclear power, bringing new power it is a claim f o