about changes in the enhanced process on a local television and was concerned about that. can you help us as to why that leaked and why some of us at least were not aware of that in the procedures and at least the fact that changes were coming? >> thank you, ranking member jackson lee. to the first point about terrorists, that's absolutely what we have the layers of security and why we do the random and unpredictable screenings at different airports in different ways. we have the detection officers, a whole range of panoply of options. as part of the overall continuum for the u.s. government in terms of our counterterrorism strategy, and you are absolutely right. there are single individuals who may be inspired by whether it is al-aulaqi or some other who is radicalized on the internet and then made -- go home to see how

to make a bomb themselves without ever communicated with anybody else, which is the key opportunity to intercept that information. that is one of the key challenges. how we go about doing it. that being said, i am very much interested as i mentioned buying opening statement using the risk-based approach. information we already know about every passenger as name, date of birth we know whether or not they are the watch list but then as far as a sometime that day trusted a traveler program, if individuals are willing to give more information about themselves so we could do criminal history czech and other checks, then we might be able to afford them a different type of security screening. so i have several working groups on this looking at a number of different options and that is the reason why i decided in november to change if the screening of pilots because these are risk-based approach is. if they are in charge of the aircraft frankly i'm not concerned if they have a prohibited item because they

could put the flight down. halloween night of 1999 when i was with the fbi coming off jfk off the coast of rhode island where the co-pilot put the flight down to 232 people. so it's not the physical screen that's going to detect that as what is in the first. so we are working with the airline and the pilots' associations to expand the three projects that we have, whether it is at bostick, but to allow them to use an identity based way of getting to the flight as opposed to the fiscal screening. the flight attendants' association also we are still in discussion about that and what that might mean. so interested in expanding that to not only the trusted travelers but how we define those. so i would be glad to discuss that further with the subcommittee as more time is available. >> one quick question. you've been meeting with stakeholders on the explosive

screening mandate. my question quickly is why are you doing that? why do we need the input? but more importantly, what happened to the aviation security advisory committee that we asked about last year to establish the security of faizal committee on the air cargo to look at some of these issues? >> the advisory committee has been working group reinstated as of last month. the secretary decided that with commissioner ellen person from cbp, myself as the co-chair and douglas smith from the private outreach office facilitating that. so that has been reinstituted. thank you for that suggestion and follow-up. the outreach in terms of the cargo is basically a one to make sure we don't dictate something to the industry that they are not capable of implementing without burdensome cost of them or inability to comply. so that's why we are working very closely with a flexible in the free area with ups and fedex, post october 29 and the cargo plot. working very closely with them to say here's what makes them,

here's what we can do collaborative flea on a partnership rather. >> i've got other questions, mr. chairman, but i will yield that. >> we will have another series. the gentleman from illinois is recognized for five minutes. -- before, mr. chairman. minister pistole, thank you very much for being here. mr. chairman, i commend you for so quickly hosting an important hearing like this. administrator pistole, let me refer to a couple things you need in your opening statement. to emphasize a few times a risk-based approach to the passenger screening. this is obviously an issue that in the general public often breeds confusion. explain in basic or more complicated terms what goes into that risk-based approach for the

passenger screening? >> thank you. right now we are not there. so we do use a one size fits all approach which i don't think it's either efficient or beneficial for the traveling public or for security. what i would like to do is spend more time with those that we assess based on all the information available to us and maybe a higher risk, clearly goes on in the botts list and things like that. but do we have further information either from intelligence or information volunteered to us by the passenger or that we see by the protection officer something suspicious about a person. so that is where we are moving to command again, i will have more information as the year goes on billion permitted to doing something this year that would demonstrate a different paradigm for how we go about doing the passenger screening, who we screen and how we screen. >> it sound like much of that will be based on the intelligence gathering. spec part of it will be. and again, it's something there

is obviously privacy issues and there will be issues that are going to be very attuned to, but a frequent traveler, for example, is willing to voluntarily provide information like they do for other trusted traveler programs like the global winter coming into the u.s. through customs, then yes i'm interested in doing that and making sure that we can guarantee need to verify the person and then make their risk-based judgment. we are not in the risky elimination business, people stop flying, that's not an option. people will have a car accident, no guarantee a must stop trading. as we don't eliminate risk but we try to mitigate risk in an informed fashion and that's what i'm committed to doing. >> to leapfrog to another issue, tsa created the partnership program airports can apply to have checkpoint screening done by private contractors currently being done at 16 airports.

in your estimation, what was the partnership begun to begin with? >> as a part of the enabling legislation of the aviation transportation security act, it was required that the five airports do a two year act to see whether that works. some members felt strongly that that should be an option, so that five was done november 02, november 04, and then other airports apply so we are at the 16, but they're just hasn't been -- there has only been to applications since i started the job last year. one that just came last week after i announced my decision. so it hasn't seemed to be that much interest in the program, so that is where it is right now. >> was the private to the pilot program deemed successful? >> yes. >> okay. and the -- at the 16 airports where it is currently being practiced, is it fair to say

that it's been fairly successful as well? >> yes. of course they filed the exact protocol standard operating procedures that we have the of the 435 or so airports around the country. they have to use the same equipment, the same training, all those things. it's just the actual individuals have to work for a private contractor rather than tsa. >> and the expansion beyond the 16 airports, that's got to come from the airports themselves? air force have to apply for the? >> sure, they apply and we evaluate. in my announcement i'm simply saying i want to see something and compelling, something substantial that would make sense to justify the changing from what the systems are already working. >> thank you. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the yanking member mr. thompson for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman.

mr. pistole, i appreciate your frankness and responding to the question. let's look at the air cargo for a moment. as you know recently received notice that the department has done the 100 per cent passenger cargo screening. has there been any problems relative to cargo being interrupted or not delivered on time with the implementation of this 100% screening? >> no, congressman, it has worked efficiently through a combination of certified cargo screen kissell these, about 1200 of them around the u.s. coupled with the screening demint airports. >> and i think that's part of closing the portability loop that pretty much all of us

identify. moving to another area, prepare stations. i'd understand that you are in the process of going into rulemakings and for what ever reason we don't have it. can you give us some idea of when some of the proposed rule making will be completed? >> we have the domestic stations obviously that you may be referring to the foreign repair stations? we work with the tsa in terms of their certification of those facilities and being qualified to do the repair work especially on the u.s. carriers support of the challenge is how we dealt with eight what they are doing meets our standards in the u.s.. so certain countries have the security protocol measurement are just not as thorough so that's part of the challenge how to work with the host government and the civil aviation

authorities and cargo companies to give that highest level of competence when they are making the repairs to the aircraft there's not something nefarious also taking place and part of that is the screening of the mechanics who work in those buildings and it is a logistics challenge for us to validate, inspect and validated the stations so that is part of what's happening. >> can you give us an idea -- >> i have to get back with you on that. i don't know of the top of my head. >> the reason i say this i think we have gone beyond the expected time on that so if you could get back to us we would appreciate it. for the record also mr. chairman, i want to kind of a share with the committee relative to the collective bargaining issue, there are

already people who have collective bargaining rights within the department of homeland security. our customs and border protection offices, immigrations, customs enforcement and the field protective service, but also within the federal government, we have the department of defense police, a united states capitol police, united states park, united states marshals service, the department of veterans affairs as well as the united states mint who police, but also the issue of security and whether or not the collective bargaining compromise that security. i would like to see that the two officers who brought down the shooter at fort hood were members of the american federation of government employees union, so i think those heroes deserve recognition and just as a side bar they were

union members, so i think they did a wonderful job, and i hope some of the concerns of collective bargaining and union can be put to rest because of that. i guess the only issue of mr. and administrator, you talked a little about it, is implementing with our imaging machines the new software. can you give us how long the pilots are expected to go before we can recognize as a result on that? >> yes, congressman. the testing began last week washington national here port and atlanta this week and we are doing between 45 and 60 days of testing to assess whether the results we had in the lab will be commensurate with what we are

experiencing with real passengers and screening it is too early to see a thread and i know from last they guess it's going well and we are working through some issues. ferc symbol, an individual with a ponytail may show up with an anomaly that could be of a machine because it's may be slightly out of the algorithm that is normal, but it is easily resolved with a visual inspection, so it's part of the training for the tsos to say okay how we resolve that, and then but of course completely i believe addresses the privacy issues that have been raised because that generic object and that icon of a person that is the same for every passenger as opposed to the individual with the area highlighted with anomaly, so it is a targeted pat-down of that area, which again, it also addresses the pat-down initio some people have concerns about. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the

gentleman from alabama, mr. brooks, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a few questions with respect to collective bargaining. if they even asked a former union who would they be bargaining with the? >> under the construct of the health legislation it gives tsa a administrator great discretion so it the only national local collective bargaining and would be with them the headquarters of tsa so we wouldn't have the the bargaining and it would be procedures that proved at the national level. it would be reviewed ultimately on the day-to-day basis. and the collective bargaining would be such as awards and

recognition, guidelines and processes and things of that nature. how we know that won't be expanded at some point to the future to include many other items because the enabling legislation gives the administrator that discretion as to what can and cannot be bargained about, and so without going through the cafeteria to say i would like this and this, i don't want that, so what is on the tray right now are just those items that i believe pam do not adversely affect in any way, so the successor administrator and would have to agree to add things to that. >> if you or your successor or to change the scope of what the collective bargaining could be about, and it would be changed? >> yes. >> will but the union committee be should the disagree with a the result of the collective bargaining? >> again, because of the broad authority there is basically a

final decision - one of the administrator and there is no from that. >> well, traditionally, unions have collective bargaining doesn't go as they wish. the exercise strike right and the exercise is to the work slowdowns. how we have any assurances that wouldn't happen in the united states and disrupt our security at the airport as a piece? >> again, congressman, because of those unique and abroad authorities have said being the administrator, none of those possibilities or options if any employee he doesn't show up for work would be disciplined and there is no issue on that under the collective bargaining. all those prophecies and engagements will remain in place. there is no work slowdown or stop or strike that is allowed and m employee can be fired for doing those things.

>> it seems our country visited this issue back in the early 1980's with the professional air traffic control organization as you probably recall it as president ronald reagan ultimately have to fire all of the employees. are you willing to do the same thing? should any of these tso workers decided to exercise work stoppage or slowdown or strike? should they disagree with your determination of the collective bargaining process? >> sure, congressmen. aboard allow anything to happen that will adversely affect the security. if an individual or a group of individuals are not performing their duty as defined, than it would go through the normal process of the discipline. >> you are willing to terminate if need be shut these individuals unionize and should they engage in work stoppages or slowdowns of any sort. >> i can envision that because

it's not traditional collective bargaining so there is no right to do that so if an individual wants to risk losing their job by not showing up or doing the work slowdown than they would be alternately result in termination. >> the reason i bring up pet coke is they get no right to do the ordering when ronald reagan returned them to work so they were terminated and i trying to get a clear yes or no answer. if there is a violation of the collective bargaining agreement should they engage in a work stoppage or slow down or engage in a strike? are you to fallujah them in mass? >> i am, yes. >> thank you. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, and let me say from the beginning that i am in

favor of tsa employees having the right to organize. i also want to feel less safe and secure and protected when i travel, and i also want to feel that the american public and all of the public who make use of our transportation system can feel the same way. i note in your memorandum relative to the collective bargaining you stated that the surveys have shown tsa ranks poorly in terms of the employee morale. how important do you think morale is in terms of service and do you think the organization or the right to organize the union would have a

positive impact on morale building. >> thank you. as you are aware of the survey in place the best place to work it was ranked out of the agencies. during a number of town halls around the country they are of course listening to the security officers and management and executives in three separate sessions. what i felt was a great deal of frustration with the lack of uniform consistency and the way we handle our policies so that is part of what i informed my decision and judgment to allow them to vote recognizing the 13,000 of the 47 nelson or so currently paying but collective bargaining, so why the fear is a lot of destruction among the work force with these personal issues that can be improved with

better uniform consistency and so that's part of my reason and rational allowing them to vote on whether they want to have a union representing them. >> there's the possibility of public employees slowing down the work in some ways disrupting the normal flow of activity. what was perhaps individuals who have grievances were dissatisfied what can they expect to do to get those results >> the existing rules we have in place will continue, so obviously they are encouraged to work through that on a partnership basis. if that doesn't happen, then

depending on what the issue is and the concern they have other opportunities to raise its collective bargaining is voted on in a union is elected with a representation at a hearing or whatever would come out as a result of that issue. >> of course i come from chicago where it is obviously quite cold right now and it's good to be from there, that is away from their. but we are also the transportation of the region as a matter of fact they suggest the transportation center of america and the cost of the strategic location. much of that relates also to surface transportation. are there any new thoughts,

provisions, guidelines that are being proposed to increase safety and security related to surface transportation? >> we recognize the surface particularly trained subways who have been subject to multiple acts around the world as i mentioned earlier. the challenge is how we shore up the defenses for individual getting on a passenger train or a subway, so we have done several things partially the trees british and security grant program working with fema and local authorities. we provide over $300 million last year for a number of transportation systems including some of those in chicago that used that money for several things. one is training of officers there may be additional que nine

programs. it may be such things as evin and new york city where last year they were able to hide your 120 or so officers in the nypd just for enhanced security in the subway with over 450 subway stations of new york city that was money through the grant program and we also have viper teams in the response teams which are at -- designed to be visible, unpredictable deterrents to those within it is here in the station or the penn station in philadelphia, new york court in chicago, and some of this grant money working with state and locals because we recognize we can't be all pilat all times we can't install strips so we have to work through the local partnership with state and local police. >> thank you very much, i yield back. >> my friend and colleague from

california is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much. thank you administrator pistole for your service to the fbi and now. thank you for taking some heroes on the issue of the full-body scanners. when that can a little while ago i name a few months ago. i would like to ask about your decision to the screening partnership program. do said members of congress when they enacted the legislation when the pilot project. the project was conducted you said the results were good. you then said however you made a decision with respect to granting collective bargaining rights to employees because you listen to them and what would be a good idea they should vote but you're doing and the airports of the country the right to vote. airports, a number of them to be involved in this and to basically now raise the bar so there has to be a compelling

reason. do you have that same standard when you decide with respect to collective bargaining compelling reasons? >> i think those are two distinguishable issues. >> was the standard when used in collective bargaining? it had to be a compelling reason for you to do it. i don't understand why you're doing it in this case. you said the surge, you need the flexibility of the surge, and yet you then testified only a couple of airports have asked for it. there's 400 some odd airports. are you saying adding to war would complicate your situation with respect to flexibility for the surge so you couldn't accomplish a task? >> what i'm saying is i didn't see a compelling reason to add to the existing 16 that would be a reason to make a change from the existing approach of using federalist work force in most airports. >> when we pass the legislation

we wanted to see whether that would work. we didn't say there would be a compelling reason to go further. the idea was to have a pilot project to see if it would work. you told us that worked but now you're saying it has to be a compelling reason. i don't understand the bias against the private sector frankly. that's what appears to be to be. if you look at the experience in san francisco international airport which has been outstanding that airport provided competition to the others and when this program first started, one of the highest rates of injury of the entire work force in the nation were screeners. the private employer in san francisco decided instead of having all of the screeners lift heavy baggage, they would actually get heavy baggage lifted and pay them a different rate. and what happened? they didn't have the same injury rate that the public sector did and in the public sector saw that was a good idea and the did

that. the idea of competition allows those kinds of things that could happen. that's why i say you have to have a compelling reason and you talk about katrina. how many private sector people responded to katrina. you're telling us that somehow because these folks work for a company that makes a profit that that somehow different? i'm just trying to get this idea through my head as to why you have this thought that we can't have private screeners when airports are saying they would like that alternative. spearman understand i believe your concerns. >> i don't believe you do based on what you said. >> i hear your concerns. we'll get a perspective what happened prior to 9/11 with private screeners.

private screeners versus federal screen as i believe there should be federal work force. estimate your answer you believe a federalist work force. >> i missed that in my comment before you or your commesso -- >> so you believe in a federalist work force rather than one that has private folks working at the direction of those? >> that's right. >> that's my philosophical approach a division defederalized work force to respond to work in the private sector? >> yes, i practiced law before i became an fbi agent. estimate is their something about the private sector that makes them unable to participate in the security of the country? demint absolutely not. >> i'm astounded to say that since that is contrary to what the congress indicated they wanted done today wanted a pilot project to see if it works.

it has worked and you have said in your testimony, but despite that you say we shouldn't allow it to go further because you believe about to be federalist work force. >> i am saying i am open to the possibility of that is why have an airport comes in and can demonstrate there is a compelling reason to change because they can do things better the line open to that. i'm not ruling that out, congressman, i just -- >> what is your body is against private-sector people being involved in security? 85% of our critical infrastructure owned by the private-sector are you suggesting we need to federalize 85% of the critical infrastructure in this country because somehow only federal workers can do the job? >> we have just the two airports come and request because there hasn't been a rush to knocked on the door to have airports submit

application to do this to this gimmick would you believe they might be discouraged by your comment? >> until the time of my announcement there have only been one and one came after the announcement i think to try to demonstrate -- >> encouraging what you said so far. >> i don't know how they would take that. >> they would say that you have said it ought to be a federal screening work force that you have to find a compelling reason which means you give them a higher bar and all sorts of reasons to believe it will interfere in your flexibility to respond to a potential disaster, and frankly i do understand what you say philosophically i disagree. i think that congress disagreed with you and frankly i'm very disappointed because i think that you are basically saying your setting a standard that's not in the law because you have for whatever reason reason for believing those in the private sector can't do as good as a job as those in the public sector and i am sorry to hear that.

>> the gentleman yield back and i recognize the gentleman from louisiana mr. richmond for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pistole, just three quickly, can you touch for me on dhaka rail to become and i know that it's probably in many districts, but our rail alliance goes through neighborhoods close to schools and close to big sporting venues and a number of other things and my -- one of my concerns has always been what happens if the rail line is used as a weapon. the share bridges with our automobiles many times. so can you touch on that for me? >> i share that concern recognizing the vulnerability and access not necessarily associated with aviation and as i mentioned with the attacks around the world particularly passenger rail and the partnership we have with the freight and passenger rail in

terms of their actions they can take with the government regulation to say it makes good business sense to reduce our risk and the example i gave the 90% reduction and the hazard risk through urban areas by industry's own initiative that is the ideal model caribbean where the industry does that voluntarily. it's not a regulation. it's simply because it is a good business sense. so we work closely with whether it is the amtrak or other rail police address the security chiefs of both freight and passenger at several different settings, and what we hope to ensure is the partnership will make informed decisions what they should do to protect the rail. >> the -- my last question will be a general question on the future of the card in the program where are we and where are we headed with it?

>> 1 million cards at this point. i could check the number to be sure but i think that's right. it's not where i would like it to be pitied it's taken longer than it should and there haven't been the successes i would like to see in terms of trying to ensure the best possible safety by those who have access to the most critical areas. so it's -- i am focused on that and want to make some improvements in the timing of the rollout. it's taking too long frankly. >> thank you for your time and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. speaking of cold weather, questioners from minnesota so we can't. >> thank you, mr. chairman and from my home town was 31 degrees below zero and i love minnesota.

i do. good for ice fishing right now. thank you. i appreciate you coming today. appreciate your service to this country and have a couple being an airline pilot seemed to grab my interest. last week the tsa began testing new software and as the automated target recognition. this is used as the current advanced imaging technology ait machines. the software will enhance pessin to pervvijze by eliminating passenger specific images into of the potential threats items on generic out line of passenger instead of the visit images we have seen all over. the tsa is conducting a pilot of the software of las vegas and international airport. jackson atlanta international airport and washington reagan airport as well. have we gotten any feedback from the passengers regarding the program so far? >> just from last vegas, mr. chairman.

this is something we are getting positive feedback because the passenger actually sees the image now along with the security officer opposed to a second officer, and it gives the passengers the confidence there's something for example on the right hip it means i forgot to take my handkerchief out of my pocket or something as opposed to a complete pat-down to try to resolve that anomaly. so far tsa should be commended for listening to the public. my concern though is in this technology make sure they can see any size of the object on the passenger from the top to the toes of full screening without getting into detail. but obviously the christmas day bomber presented one of those touches since we are field testing this. it is actually the same equipment, just a different

depiction of the image. it's to detect those types of nonmetallic bombs as the cut on christmas day there is a 100% guaranteed silver bullet just the best technology and we are trying to improve that to respect currently the new software is being tested for the millimeter wave machines and when do you expect this to be piloted back scanner ait? >> the manufacturer is working on the auto detect function and the algorithm so we are thinking about what the leader this summer with lab testing and field testing in the fall. estimate of the pilot project does go well do you plan to put these machines in every one of the airports or we have obviously the funding is would be the key. >> yes, as much as the budget would allow we will convert the existing if it is a to our

conversions of its minimal cost as soon as we are able to do that assuming we get the good result we are hoping for. >> excellent. thank you for your time and i yield back. >> the chair recognizes himself for a series of questions. currently, transportation workers have a number of different identification credentials. among these but not limited or the card we already talked with, commercial driver's license, hazardous materials endorsement, and the secure trade car. these credentials all have a separate application process and require separate background checks many of which are redundant. stakeholders in the transportation industry experts strong concern to me that we need to address the redundancies. can you tell me what you can do to get some relief? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i agree with you and the industry that there are too many

cards but to many applications for too little return on the process. i don't have much in terms of positive news on that. it's larger than just tsa or even the department. so working through a number of areas on the universal rule of having ideally one card the would get access to the question if a person has access to the report of the applications if they don't need access to the airport if they don't need access to the commercial driver's license with a cast that endorsement there's different applications for different people. very few people who would have all of those needs of access such as the sensitive area of the airport so there is some basis but i think it's become much too cumbersome and i look forward to working with you and the committee on streamlining the process. >> i'm glad you offered that comment. one of the other things going on in the various sectors of the

transportation is inviting them to give proposed rule changes with their its regulation that's redundant or is just overly burdensome. and i would urge you to tender those to consider us working to get rid of redundant and unnecessary rules, and i don't know if you've had the anybody in your department looking at the existing regulation that can streamline, but i would urge you to do that because it is becoming problematic for a lot of the different sectors. my colleagues on the committee would be disappointed in me if i didn't bring up k9, going to do that to the economy zealous advocate for the use of the k9 explosive assets and i would like you to tell us -- you mentioned earlier the use of those. tell us where you are with that sector of your security. >> i am a big proponent of the

k9 program and the actor will detection of explosives but also the deterrent effect of those possible terrorists who might be deterred by the presence of a >> k9 candler regardless whether it is involved or not. i am also heartened by the initiative through auburn university of the vapor wait technology. the devotee for a dog trained to not just hit on the package or the backpack or whatever it may be containing the explosives but pick up the vapor as somebody has walked through, for example at moscow the question would be if there had been a deeper trained dog in that area even after the person walked through that bald would have likely been able to pick up on something like that so in terms of what we

are doing tall burned and a number of additional opportunity to deploy those dogs as the budget rule out. >> i hope that is what we will see and the budget next week and the president expressed her desire to see the assets utilized in the sectors of our security system. as you know, the facility that you had what one is the money that has been suggested by the secretary spent to expand the facility is the man to be at its maximum capacity. it's going to generate two under 75 the year. we are going to have to have a second site at least for the production of those assets and training, hoping you are working for the secretory on that and and i can assure you want to be a partner because we need those at sifry airport and at every

rail station and they are just a very low-cost very effective asset. my time is up and i now recognize the gentlelady from texas for another series of questions. >> thank you mr. chairman, administrator pistole i recognize my appreciation. i want to give some questions not aimed at you, but in any even if i could get quick answers i would appreciate it. you need to answer the original question about the notice to the ranking member at that time the chairwoman of the changes that occurred, the change that occurred back then, but let me skip and not go all the way back to november but the changes that occurred in the immediate last two or three weeks that i called about and saul first on our local tv program that changes were coming to the enhanced process and was aired on our local station in houston. i would like to have better

communication, so if you answer that when i give you the series of questions, first of all, and i want to reinforce and think you i think that your whole process on the stp were thoughtful and and it's important to acknowledge again the security operations at airports to private screen has cost the government more money and we are cost conscious but we don't want to be cheap on security and i think that's important. also believe, as i asked my earlier question, that it's important and we have an integrated system of the federal screening the of the agency to quickly react to terrorists and threats in a more secure way. i also believe the mention of intelligence is so very important in my want to congratulate you for getting a high number of security to be defined by also specifically a note appreciation for colonel tester fisa within my jurisdiction and she has done a great job. let me publicly say i look forward to touring the cargo

space you've been in fighting in the hope to be there shortly. but i want to follow up very quickly and now these are the quick question status report on the tsa repair station we been working on that repair station security a long time and if i can just get one or two updates. on the international front after yemen we rushed overseas to establish, and also the christmas day bomber incident, the last point of departure in foreign countries, and i'd like to know what we have done, what about our agreement on how we in congress can be helpful and what tools or resources to help you achieve passenger baggage and the security at the foreign airports and i know some of those are international agreements, but we need to know how we can ramp it up and move all labeth faster. i have always been concerned in making sure that america and the

american federal government look like america and i know that my friends agree with me. so i am very interested in a targeted, forceful, a meaningful approach to diversify the executive and mullen executive level at the tsa come and working with people from diverse backgrounds i ask that question of the psychiatry in putting people of different faiths, religion, particularly the muslim community, and i'm also interested in homegrown outreach for hispanics, african-americans, asians and native americans, and of course texas anglo-american speed a diverse work force that reflects everyone. so, i'm hoping someone was writing those questions on if i can get some answers from you again quickly. thank you. >> thank you, madame. i wasn't sure if you wanted those answers right now? let me briefly on air cargo with

yemen, i was in yemen five days ago with the authorities, the country team very briefly, fully engaged with industry to ensure that any cargo coming from yemen once we lifted the hold which was put into effect immediately would have the best screening possible, and we are still continuing the foot process and can give you a further update -- >> and put it in writing to read what are you working on the international agreement? >> yes and working with the aviation organization and the world customs organization. >> the repair station, as i mentioned earlier event of the specifics to it i have to get back to you on that. >> very important, and as you know this whole idea of what happens when an hour or airplanes or expos overseas and need repair as the gentleman from rhode island had begun working on, but we need an extensive answer on that.

>> diversity, and that you know tsa has the most diverse work force not only in the dhs but in the federal government, and we've got all the figures on that. >> let me get that in writing because you say that all the time and what you're talking about is the tso officers and by talking about the executive level that is very important, and i want to speak with the chairman on this professional development issue. when i travel through what i hear is bright intelligence folks with no place to go. so we need to sort of get an understanding of how we advance, give them the opportunity to be professionals and move forward. so i really want to ensure you have never gotten about this noticed situation on hearing the news on the television as opposed to the chairman and myself -- >> and i apologize for that, ranking member sheila jackson lee. if there was something -- i am drawing a blank on what that was. >> we are talking about the aic.

our news report before i even knew anything about it that you are changing. >> from the atr testing? >> this is not 2011 and i'm going back to november. >> obviously i want to keep you and the chairman fully informed, and when i don't do that that is on me to do a better job. >> i just want to say it's not only the chairman that mentions k9 on this issue. i look forward to you hopefully pumping that up with talented, healthy animals that are a great asset and i hope we will be able to visit. with that thank you for your indulgence and i think that will yield back at this moment. >> the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and understanding being in the military and the airline pilot understand is the best way to go about this is it leaders

security because there are layers of threats. there is no silver bullet as you say. it starts basically from when a person purchases a ticket to win the right to the airport to when they check their bags or not to when they go through a screening point to when they actually go on board the aircraft. so in recent terrorist attacks in the moscow airport, unfortunately, this was conducted in a non-secure area. that's one of these threats and these layers of security or so important. i was just wondering what are your thoughts as the tsa increased security for the bonds to your area's, and one of six promising and we've gone through several times myself as for human intelligence, human interaction, we can discern a lot of these threats before the actually enter more of a secure

area. >> i was wondering what your thoughts are. >> i couldn't agree more congressman. i believe strongly in the behavior detection and observation of individuals and we have a number of officers trained in that regard. i'd like to increase that in terms of the training and capabilities basically to upgrade that even more because that is a good return on investment. we work as far as the non-secure areas of moscow. we work closely with the airport police and the other major airports in the 28 largest airports get the best course the smaller airports which may or may not have a dedicated police force, so we try to do that in conjunction with them recognizing will enforce the authorities and their ability to protect and detour somebody coming in from the curbside. although the intertek detection officers are outside of this area in the on secure area looking for people going to the checkpoints, it is much an

opportunity i think for the airport police and others to detect in conjunction with us. so given our responsibilities particularly at the checkpoint and beyond and the federal air marshals on the flight i look forward to working with the subcommittee on additional things we can do, so there is a whole range of things we can do and i of land that in a paper to the secretary and we provided information to the russian authorities to ask for what can you do in terms of reading things such as vehicle checkpoints, l.a.x., los angeles international, from time to time they will do a random vehicle checkpoints before you ever get to the curb. that's something that can be done. you can have more fiber teams walking and there's a visible of deterrence, so there's a whole range of opportunities looking at with the resources are in the budget and things like that. >> i couldn't agree with you more because of the leaders of

threats we need intervention as well. >> a good way to present it. >> also, following the confirmation hearing you comment to the shift from airplanes to the ground transportation, and you reviewed that they're real and subways are equally important, and i couldn't agree more. i wouldn't want your job. as a threat against the aviation importance we also have to take a look at our grant transportation, and the resources allocated to the aviation security efforts account for roughly 80% of the tsa's budget. do you see that moving at all? >> working with this committee and the rest of congress very interested in the opportunities that we would have to do more in the transportation because i believe that there are some vulnerabilities that are just inherent in the construct of being able to get on the train without any screening. we do five rent teams in high profile case is whether it is the invitation, new york and

things like that the nature of the system is more vulnerable. the rail themselves are vulnerable in certain respects and if you go into a lot of detail from that perspective i agree that more should and could be done. it is a question of at this point we take something away from the aviation security to address that, and i am reluctant, given the terrorist interest and continued interest in aviation plots. >> thank you. one last question and its generic and i don't expect much detail, but what keeps you awake at night? >> the unknown, and this is based on my 27 years of the fbi, the unknown that somebody we haven't identified being able to do something and we missed. >> thank you. i yield back the rest of my time. >> which recognizes the gentle lady from california for five minutes. >> if i could just welcome this

speire to the committee. >> thank you mr. chairman and the ranking member. i reserve the oversight government reform, so i snuck out of that committee to come and say hello to mr. pistole. i would like to explore the issue of the foreign repair operations. we are struggling with how we can create more jobs in this country, and meanwhile, some of our carriers are offshore in the the repair work of many of their facilities. so we have mechanics now out of work. but the more crushing issue and the one you're going to be concerned about is the fact that in a briefing that i received just last week, the security at these four and locations --

foreign locations is very, very little, and i was shown pictures of how they actually checked people in and it's basically with the car you can pick up everywhere. it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to get one of those to get into the area to stow away a bomb or some biological warfare that could create serious problems. so number one, what steps are you taking to beef up the security that these airlines are evidently not pursuing in these four revenues and second, is there some thought to bringing these jobs back to the united states so we could have a great sense of security and more jobs here in the homeland? >> thank you, congresswoman and welcome to the subcommittee. clearly the issue of the foreign repair stations is significant. i want to address the job issue

too much because i'm focused on security aspects. but clearly the carriers at times need those repair stations based on whatever has happened in terms of maintenance or repair that is needed. you have precisely identified with the challenges are. there's a great inconsistency around the world is to the locations as you were briefed on last week. our challenge is how we can do without inspecting those with any sense of assurance and confidence that they are doing what they should be doing in terms of screening the employees mechanics of work. screening of the material that they bring so not something that they are actually putting on the plane that wouldn't be found what there is a cargo bomb or something else. so our challenge we simply don't have the resources to do what i would want to offer the american people and the airlines as a high level of confidence in the

security of the organizations, so we work with the host governments bilaterally and also work through the international aviation motivation that sets minimum standards but it really comes down to how do we trust and verify. so we have to have some amount of trust in our foreign partners, but the question of the verification and validation is what they are doing, and i can't give you a positive report on that today as yes every single former repair station meets the standards we would like to see here in the u.s. comes of it is something we are working on but it's not there yet. >> let's not even talk of the foreign carriers, let's talk about the u.s. carriers that have of short their mechanical repair work in el salvador and around the world. we do have the authority over them, do we not? this is united airlines i'm speaking of.

>> obviously we work with united and the facility to basically assess whether their standards are of two hours, and if they are not, then we can say you are not allowed to do that repair work. so it is incumbent upon not only the station but the airline and the host government and the authority to ensure that the case. my concern is being able to as i mentioned to validate what they are doing. >> i guess what i'm asking them is on want you to assess the security in el salvador as the repair facility that united runs, because it appears to be to justin complete and lack of and if you not have authority to force them to beef up their security, then we need to make sure you have that authority in the than any other penalties that should be opposed.

.. in his people out of concern they can go through the regular one. as a recipient of an artificial hip and artificial knee, i get a chance to get up close and personal with your screeners every time i fly. and if you want everybody to testify as to the newly aggressive enhanced pat downs, i

can testify to that. i am very strongly in support of getting these advanced imaging imaging -- well, the various types of advanced imaging facilities out there. and i was wondering, would his decision-making and which do not. ever talks about reagan. i was a much better experience than on the patdown. i play it in a dulles, which is a pretty important airport for the national capital region. and they've just completed a new terminal. the just completed a new entire floor for people going through the process, yet i have not seen a single enhanced image piece of

equipment they are. is there a reason why -- >> in this national region, we don't have any at dulles. >> yesterday, three days ago. >> we do what the list. i don't know the exact number. it's been and will process the last several months of being deployed to make a check point. the method lets you find it because i will use it. >> anyway -- >> how do we decide, which airports get them as we move them on? it seems to me that you are committed to that and believe in them and you believe now that we can even do a better job of assuring people of privacy concerns, even though i believe we have done a pretty good job in the past. >> what is the process for deciding -- is that an airport request? thing i guess, several fact

others be at one of the airport authority configuration they are , the machines to take up more real estate, more space than metal detectors. some airports we have to reconfigure the check point. and so there's our ports, speaking generally no, airport said that the space and willingness to take those machines is where we went first. then the survey have to do costs involved, all of those issues make it more complicated. so if they longer process. we've got 2200 check point around the country. the budget doesn't allow for every check point. i'll tell you, listeners will airports. do not recall was when i left sacramento when i went to the one that the list to announce weeks ago in a set off the detector. i went to the patdown. after he got the patdown they

said you should have asked for the machine. no one told me there was a machine. it might be hopeful that they give an opportunity for people to use the machine if they want to get the machine. i will be happy to testify for anybody as to the less invasive privacy aspects of going through one of your new pieces of equipment as opposed to having the patdown because their people are doing a very good job at that. i talked to about the secure traveler program. are we checking for things or are we checking for people? >> so right now we are talking about prohibited items and assessing the person and that's what i was talking about earlier in terms of using market intelligence wrist-based approach. clearly i think very many opportunities for tonight to go into detail with the subcommittee at a later date. i'm still working internally,

but i think there's some very good options will see later this year. the max for several years we've been arguing it make no sense for the pilots to go through when they controlled the airplane later on. it -- i just posit a question. if you have a group of people who are permitted under the laws of the united states -- did the highest classified review you can possibly have -- it seems strange to me -- maybe you have intelligence to share with the reader to find the members of congress rss that caused. but all i can face your people to a very good job of making sure that i know that they do it through examination of me every time i go through. >> i appreciate that. i will note we have a briefing by gao because of soreness covert testing of beef this

every time, but they said the most recent testing in january they found to be the most thorough and the best. i think the subcommittee will be interested in some of the ways forward of the risk based approach in taking what more we know about a person, doing some prescreening basically to go to identity-based screening. >> you folks have done a good job. every time i forgotten hairspray, they've can't knit tonight detroit out, so i appreciate that. >> we have 16 at ait dulles now. >> the gentleman yield that. i have no further question the ranking member has no further questions, so we will close. i wanted in? for your time and your answers symbol think the members for their questions. we will hold a hearing open for 10 days. members may have written questions to submit to you and i want to get those in a timely

manner. eveready given you for questions from the aaa key and i urge your timely to those to address your concerns and their the other sect is the transportation was taught about year-to-date. >> thank you, cheering ranchers. >> .com and the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> republican representative michelle bought a note in the annual cpac meeting today talking about the tea party movements. the conference is hosted by the american year-to-date union. ♪ new ♪ ♪ ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome comic david keith.

[applause] be not thank you very much and welcome to the 38th annual conservative political action conference. [cheers and applause] when i was with like dean on the past at our first cpac, we had 125 people and their speaker was ronald reagan. [cheers and applause] we gather here on the 100th anniversary of ronald reagan's birth and we expect this weekend, something like 11,000 people. >> i can assure you that that growth has come about not because of anything we do here although we'd like to think we played a small part and have played a small part in the growth and cohesion of the

conservative movement. it is happening because of the work of a lot of folks like you over the years who have turned this movement into a real force about which is on the verge of being able to change this country so that we will be able to pass on a nation to our children and grandchildren is great as a nation left to us by our grandfathers and those that came before them. [applause] to have been part of the army has been a great honor. to be associated with u.s. been one of the greatest honors of my life. i began sharing this conference has some 20s years ago and over the years we've had argument, debates. we've focused on different issues and throughout that time, these conferences has grown and every year they are bigger. and today the conference is,

cpac conferences are an iconic part of the american political scene. over the next couple of days, you are going to see, hear and i hope question many of the people who wake up in the morning thinking they ought to be have to be president of the united states. not all of them because we didn't have enough days to accommodate everybody that thinks he or she ought to be president, but a lot of them. more importantly we sit down in a good team at these each year, we look back at what has been happening to my look at what it's going to happen or what we all hope will happen to them we say what should we on? the story of the last two years has been the story of an awakening of political and

ideological awakening among the american people, an awakening that was first evident in the town hall meeting set to face than the obama admin is patient first unveiled its health healte plan to the american people, an awakening that continued with development of the tea party movements and an awakening that became real even do some skeptics in washington but a lot of the folks who pooh-poohed the new awakening monster jobs in november. [applause] remember when it all started and nancy pelosi -- you remember she used to be beaker of the house. [laughter] nanci polybius says this is a crest tops movement and initiated.

i sat at a time when a member of congress and i worked to put together after. we all have to get to turn a town hall meetings. and if we ever get five or six or seven to go, that was considered a great success. no member of congress regardless of his ideology, regardless of his party, regardless of his willingness to stand with the president who went to his home district and phase 2000, 1500 or 2000 constituencies -- constituents are upset with the direction the country was taken could really sit back and see me at the company you are right about that. so as the summer went on, you will recall members of congress begin can't land a town hall meetings because they didn't want to meet with constituents anymore. and then, they decided that this wasn't a ploy by the insurance company, ms view voip by ray says were extremists for crazy

people and they began to derive their fellow citizens that way. i have a good friend who is a liberal from the midwest we send in the summer that he had never been to one of the sending this in a relatively small town, so he went to a tea party gathering in this town. he said i had two reactions. one come i never seen that many people at a political gathering in my town and secondly, i didn't know any of them. india was the fact that nobody knew any of them that was so important, that was a reflection of the fact that more and more americans were getting upset with the direction the government was taking and wanted to do something about it. one of the things we decided we needed to do this here is focused on those people that are in the process of changing the world. and not all of us. and these are our new allies that these are the people we want to bring in. [applause]

the new congress includes 37 people who have never run for office before they ran for congress in 2010. [applause] and the advantage of those people is that if you have any place long enough, many of you in business, politics. if you talk to someone who's been there too long, they can tell you exactly what they can't do. they will tell you what can't be done because they've never been able to do it. the advantage of bringing in new people is they don't know what can't be done. we saw this in the congress this week, with the leadership, well-meaning as they are, the republican leadership came forth with some savings, some cuts in the obama budget. and all of these new members of that is not what we promised. we promised more. and for about 24 hours they said more is not possible and then they went back to the committee and came up with more. the people who didn't know it can be done so just go do it.

and that people would then he realized if he just did it, you could. [applause] one of the things that is going to happen over the course of the next year or so is that washington is going to try to work it away with these people. already, they are being taken aside by veterans and by lobbyists and others in saying upcoming campaigns are one thing, rennert is one thing, but it's really hard and there are things you can't do, say a bachelor to get along and go along. and it's important to have people to say no. our keynote speaker for this conference is someone but fantastic ties to this movement. but more importantly, when i thought about michele bachmann -- [cheers and applause] we decided to go to her not just because she's a fellow midwesterner, which always helps

and not just because of the position she's taken, but i remembered when she first came to washington, one of the things we do is get together with the freshmen. and she came to me after that red-faced and said you have to really keep on these people. she said it in minnesota when i was in the legislature, you could feel it. you could feel the separation taking place as he became acculturated to what you had joined and you could feel yourself being pulled away from the voters. what you need in the legislature at the state level and national level is a core of people who with us will tell the people around them, don't be seduced. don't let them get to you. remember why you were sent here. remember what he wanted to come here. remember your values. remember your police. and do the job you says you are

going to do when you ran for office. michele bachmann is part of that core. [applause] she male felt the existence of those seductive forces around her, but she has never, ever given it to them. and with people like michelle, you can bet that the new people coming to town for joining with people who are here to meet the changes she needs. it is my great honor to present to you our keynote speaker and someone many of you know and all of you admire, michele bachmann of minnesota. [cheers and applause] ♪

[applause] >> good morning, cpac. how is everyone doing? you are looking great this morning. thank you for the invitation. someone told me i needed to find the right camera. so let me see. okay, i'll usm l. fans, i know where it is. i think were good to go. good morning, cpac and thank you for inviting me to be here with you. does that feel great? if a new day in washington d.c. [applause] we have so much to be grateful for it i want to commend you. david, i understand this is the most astounding attendant keypad. 11,000 strong and growing over the weekend. our movement is a growing movement, a big movement and i'm excited to be a part of the family. because i am looking right now at the problem solvers of

america. that's who you were. you are an exciting group of people. you believe in problem solving and i can feel your energy that is here. it's real. it's exciting. something that will continue building all week, because already after everything he's done in the last election, you've already changed america for the better. just having the house of representatives going to conservative hand with a huge down payment for bringing our country back and a thank you from the bottom of my heart for everything that you've done. [applause] we are also a varied god-based coalition. and some of you who are gathered here today, you are all about your passion and fiscal conservatives and i am one of few. and for some of you who were here, your passion is about

defending the moral values that grounded this country. and i am one of you. and some of you who are here are all about national security and making sure that we continue our legacy of peace through strength. i am one of you. this is something we need to be proud of and be thanked both for. [applause] we are excited how we work together in this three-legged stool of fires in so many of you got off the couch in this last election and you decided that you were not going to take it anywhere. i want a show of hands. how many of you before this election were so-so about politics and nation? how many of you this was the first time you ever got involved in politics? standout. let's take a look and give your round of applause.

thank you for joining the family. thank you for what you've done. you are amazing people and they want to thank you because of what she did, you have been a part of the down payment on bringing back liberty in this country. and look what you accomplished. you helped to win 87 new seats in the house of representatives. 87. [applause] and you helped pry that big gamble either speaker pelosi's pants. did anybody see that? [cheers and applause] she wasn't real willing to let sean boehner have it, but he got it. we are thankful. john boehner, by the way it is fine these days.

zero yes, a new day. more importantly, speaker pelosi gave up the national credit card that had an unlimited talent sonnets apparently and no atm fees. it's out of our hands. she doesn't have it anymore. and as well as we did in the house, it was also all someone had been in the united states senate to case you help deliver it to rescind the senate like kentucky senator ray and palm. [cheers and applause] florida senator, marco rubio. pennsylvania senator, pat to me. [cheers and applause] utah senator, mike leigh. [cheers and applause] arkansas senator, john goodman.

[cheers and applause] indiana senator, dan coats. kansas senator, jerry moran. missouri senator, roy blunt. new hampshire senator, kelley iota. north dakota senator john ho fan. ohio senator bob portman. wisconsin senator, ron jon van. illinois senator, mark kerr. that is dirt team knew publican senators in this last election. we only need for moore's and others can be when the united states senate. [cheers and applause] and then harry reid will have the very rich opportunity to join speaker pelosi, now nancy pelosi and the new minority.

more importantly, common sense and a new hopefully conservative majority will run the united state senate. and don't think a conservative senate wouldn't be a huge change from decades of leadership here in washington d.c. but it gets even better. take a look at the governor's seat in this last election. after the governor's seat, we have 29 out of the fifth these seats are in republican hands. 29 governor's seat. [applause] twenty-year democrats and there is always an independent health or somewhere. so even more good news. they think this actually might be some of the best news of all. enters data house seats in our state senate seat, because of all the work you did, we flipped

680 feet in the statehouse and state senate senate for this country. that is a record number, by the way. and what is even more a lack of fine about these numbers is the fact that all of the work you did paid off this year in the once every 10 years redistrict canseco. so that governors in all the legislatures that control the political lines that will determine these races for the next 10 years will be john this year with these new governors sent representatives, controlling the chambers all across this country. if there was ever a time to make a change, this was it and you did it. [applause] because you not only surprise the great power for a lot of these elections come you with a

hands on and defeat on and actually went and did the doorknocking. he drove people to the polls because this was an historic change election. and this was the change that we were hoping for and you did it. so give yourself a much deserved round of applause. i do. [applause] and i think after all that work, it's altogether fitting and proper that we throw ourselves a huge party. and so here we are going to party. conveniently enough, i am throwing you a party today at 8:30. so come one, come all. the tab is mine. come to my party. you are all welcome. all 11,000 of you. so, 5:30 today. i want to shake your hand out and i personally want to thank everybody for everything you

did. but party hearty today because after this weekend, we need to start focusing on step two is taking the country back. as much as we're patting ourselves on the back this weekend and we were successful, nowadays step two. and step on on or not if for not if we don't successfully complete step two. are you savvy? [applause] because we have to win a conservative senate. the same type of friend paul and marco rubio that came in this year, we need more of the same to come into the senate so it's a conservative senate, not just a republican senate. can you hear me clacks ..

why is it so important? why are we on our feet? why are we up for 2012? it's important for this reason, because your future is personally tied into the resultant of the next election. it's that important. i want to give you just a few

facts. when the liberals took over the house of representatives, the national debt was a trillion dollars. that was january of 2007. eight jolie in dollars. even for liberals, that's a lot of money. [laughter] that's how much it was. during the next four years the liberals held up in the nation's capital, the nation's credit card, get this, the liberals rose the debt $6 trillion to now 14 trillion, and we are being asked once again to raise the debt ceiling. you heard about that? raise the debt ceiling. now think about this, think about the context. it took this government 230 years from 7076 on till 2006. 230 years from the inception of the nation until 26 our national debt was a heart palpitating

$8 trillion. we were all biding our fingernails very worried about it, and in only four years' time, with speaker pelosi, harry reid, the liberals increased the amount a whopping 75%. what have took us for 32 years to accumulate. that caught the attention and imagination of everyone in this country last november. it caught their attention, and thanks to you in your enthusiasm , the american people, republican, independent, libertarian, even democrats went to the polls and stop. enough. we are not going to go down this wrote in a more of debt accumulation. and the numbers below the opposite of management and budget are now telling us if president obama wins another four year term is that going to have been? okay let's be clear about that

cpac family. let's be clear. we will be in debt to the tune of $21 trillion. that's six years from now. remember, four years ago we were 8 trillion. six years from now we will be out 21 if barack obama wins another term and goes on his trajectory. but as troubling as all these figures are to us, there is one segment, however, who is not worried about the high level of debt accumulation. and that, you might say, are our friendly chinese bankers. they are not worried about this and you may know that the president of china is named hu, president hu, and with all the money we owe china i think we might rightly say hu's your daddy. [laughter]

right? now let me just give another living example of what 1 million, 1 billion, one trillions of light. i'm up here waving a flag saying it's like a way amount of money but it is. if you take $1 million comfort to second time, 1 million in seconds equals 11 and a half days. if you take 1 billion seconds and convert 1 billion seconds into time, that equals 32 years. there's a difference between mollyann and billy and there's an even greater difference between building in and trillion. if you convert 1 trillion seconds into time, that equals 32,000 years. so when we are talking trillium, going from 8 trillion to 14 to 21, this is a stunning level of debt that we have never even

imagined before and the calculus of recent history. so let me explain what the level of debt could mean to you personally. according to the national center of policy analysis, in the 2009 they said that college-age students today -- we have college-age students here today? yes, yes. you will all be at my party today. one trend limit. [laughter] i mean that, too. i mean that. i've got to say something here, i am a conservative -- in your peak earning years you will be looking at paying 37% of everything you make to the government just to satisfy social security and medicare 337%. that's more than one-third of your income to pay for that. wait, just realized that doesn't include what you will owe to the federal government for your federal income tax portion, and

that could easily be another 25% of your income, and if you can do the math, pull out your calculator, that 62% of your income just your federal income tax and medicare and social security portion of what you make. but now that doesn't include your state income taxes, and that could be another 8% for a lot of you, but that doesn't include what you pay in sales tax. that would include gas taxes or local property taxes or telephone taxes or cellphone taxes. you want me to go on? this goes on and on and on all the way to death taxes. they did you coming and going and if you read all of this up, you college students here today, you are looking at 70 to 75% of your income taken away by the government in taxes in your peak earning years. i'm a federal tax lawyer. that's what i did for a living

in the real world. i have a doctor's degree, tax law, all i did is practiced tax law, and i saw the devastating impact of the high taxes on individual come on business people, farmers, this is real. these are real numbers. this isn't just somebody in a melodramatic way of trying to scare you. this is your future. this is your reality. that's why this isn't like the green bay packers or the steelers like the republicans and democrats whose team is going to win. that is not what this is about to read this is about the kind of america we are going to have and the kind of life you will have and the future you will have if 2012 those other than what all of us are hoping in the next few years. because 75% tax rate means for you quite literally is that three-fourths of your work day

will be spent working to pay on will sam and you will be living off 25% of your salary so let me ask a question. in and how were you going to pay for a home mortgage on 25% of your salary? how are you going to pay for your car payment on 25% of your salary or buy food on 25% of your salary or pay for your energy bill or electronic bill or more importantly, how are you going to pay for your itunes down load on 25% of your salary? then there is a monstrosity called obamacare. [booing] i'm there. that created new boards and commissions. just realize, this over 2,000 page bill that nobody read by the way, nobody read the bill, the 2000 page bill the president

signed it has already generated over 6,000 pages of new rules. so don't think that we already have a lot. this is a law that will never end. it is going to grow and grow and grow, and it won't be 6,000 pages of rules, no pity it will be tens of thousands of pages of rules. because just like we hear the liberals talk about a living constitution, you heard that, these laws are, quote, lifting call. when we put our little card in the machining and go red or green, it is what all the bureaucrats behind the curtain continually conjured up, and obamacare is a never ending a little gift that keeps on giving towards liberalism, and as bad as it is, is only the beginning, which wouldn't be a problem apparently if you are one of the more than 700 people who've gotten the waiver from

obamacare. have you heard about this? this isn't exactly equal justice under the law. over 700 privileged unions or companies can be given a waiver from the scribbling mandates under obamacare. so it is under a president obama's we of thinking some of us are more equal than others under obamacare and i tell you what i would like pyrrophyte and i would like to have from a waiver from the last two years of the obama administration's. are there any takers? i want to waiver. [applause] there is no question and i have no reservation in saying this. we have seen president obama a share in socialism under his watch over the last two years. [applause] and obamacare is quite clearly the crown jewel socialism, and repealing it is the driving motivation of my life.

the first political breath i take every morning is to repeal obamacare. [applause] you too. retial now. retial now. i think the reason we are motivated to make sure this terrible piece of legislation gets repealed is probably more than any other piece of legislation passed this is legislation that has the potential for diminishing our quality-of-life quite literally making life-and-death decisions for all of us for the rest of our lives if we don't repeal this bill. so the obama socialist program of the bailout in the takeover puts bureaucrats in charge of more of the private-sector

giving us more regulations, more fully, mandate, burden on the nation's job creators and owners. i'm a job creator and my husband and i created over 50 jobs in our states. we are so stinking proud of that that we have been able to do that. and we want to make sure that more people across the country can realize that dream of starting a business and doing what they were born to do. because unfortunately, under this regime that president obama has put into place, it is a formula for destruction of job creation, and it's an agenda that does jeopardize our free-market system because it does two things. it attacks our core values of incentives that drive growth and personal responsibility. can you imagine what do we get by taking away people's personal responsibility for their action?

all we have to do is look at the clinton administration. say no more. i only say that because president clinton cannot last night and told me i live in a parallel universe when it comes to my understanding of obamacare. do we want to talk about a parallel universe for a moment? [laughter] [cheering] socialism kills job creation everywhere that it for years its ugly head. except for government. it rears its ugly head. and we are witnessing an employment for over 20 months in excess of 9%. in fact, the gallup poll came out and said the current unemployment is actually at 9.9%. and when the only john rosebud we are growing are in government, when that music stops, it is a game over. and the game doesn't end very well. we have a real-life example of where the socialistic path is taking us.

exhibit a increase. take a look at greece. here you have people in the streets because they wanted more government, and why were they writing? because of retirement age was going to go from age 61 to 63 the middle those evil bureaucrats. that is the end result of socialism when the demand equations knows no bounds. or spain, spain has the highest unemployment right now in europe. remember president obama told us early on in his administration we have to be more like spain. do you remember that? we've got to be more like spain and put into place the wind generation and all the things spain is about because that is the future. i don't know about you, i don't want 22 per cent unemployment in the united states means reality right now. we don't want to be seen. we want to be america. we are the indispensable nation of the world. [applause]

[cheering] of the indispensable nation of the world is america. [applause] and socialism might sell well in the harvard faculty lounge, but when it comes to finding a job, not so much. not so much. and the moral tragedy i believe personally of president obama's agenda is not only that his tax spending agenda is consuming most of which your parents and grandparents took a lifetime to build up, and with the current workforce is producing. i think the most egregious moral wrong of all is that today's government is intentionally consuming the future leaders of generations of americans that aren't even born. this is unbelievable what's happening because you need to consider that no previous generation, not the heroes of

the revolutionary war, not a hero of the civil war were the survivors of world war i or world war ii or the great depression or korea or vietnam. none of the previous generations has left any subsequent generation so tied up in debt that they are very substance was already spoken for before they even had a chance to come into this world and it's baffling that this wasn't just any nation that did this, this is our nation that has done this. a great nation like ours. one that has reached the absolute unparalleled height of the world superpower status. we are one that is the world's leading innovator in invention of the largest economy, the finest universities we would choose an action for the future that's anything other than putting the best interest of this generation first?

could we be so selfish? no generation has been more selfish than the current generation that's been running washington, d.c. and it's time selling it. [applause] that's not compassion, that's selfishness. this is what i believe. that you and your future are what matters to us now. and it's not about building a welfare state. i think it's building your state of well-being. that's what we need to focus on. because i think you deserve no less shot at life than what your parents received, what your grandparents receive, and that is all coming back to why 2012 is so all important, because if you do well, then america will do well and will be strong and we will be secure. and you know, it's not all doom and gloom here because we

certainly are not without solutions. in fact, i have to stick couple of suggestions that will go a long way towards fixing our economy. first of all, the president could stop the epa from implementing a cap-and-trade system that would destroy the future of energy creation in this country. [applause] the president could easily support the balanced budget amendment going forward. i signed onto it, he could sign on to it. use all the time magazine cover that had barack obama and ronald reagan -- not so much, maybe a little short. of the president wanted to prove he was ronald reagan, he could sign a balanced budget amendment and maybe we would agree. the president could agree to an energy policy that actually increases american energy production. we are sitting on a gold mine

here in the united states. we are the saudi arabia of energy right here. it's just be legal to access it. so let's get off of overdependence on foreign oil. we've got all the energy that we could use here in the united states. then the president could turn back some of the 142 regulations that he put into place in the two years that he's been on the job. and more than 132 of his regulations or processed in excess of $100 million or more. in the president could retial obamacare. he could support free-market solutions like medical malpractice reform. really, not just say it, really do it, and then allow all of us to buy any health care policy we want anywhere in the united states with no minimum mandates. you do that, that attacks the root problem of health care but are the cost drivers. free-market work.

let them. [applause] and while all of these economic threats are very real, and they are, i have been a witness on the front lines of history the last four years in the united states house of representatives. they are real, they are disquieting and why people all across this country didn't even care about political affiliation. they came together under this broad heading and said we don't like what these guys are doing. we've got to have something else. and while that is so true, and why we have come together, we need to remember, and we can't forget that there are other threats that loom as well. threats to the moral grounding of this nation and threats to our national security. because a wise man named solomon once said that a court of three strands is not easily broken and any carpenter will tell you a

three leggitt store is strong and stable and a blunt takeover very easily. and as important as these distressing economic concerns are, we would be wise to recall and not forget that for our conservative coalition to be victorious in 2012, it will take everyone of us and then some pulling together to three to become known to the to -- to bring the three legs together. the fiscal secure deily, the national and the social conservatives legs to work together. we cannot shun each other for 2012. [applause] the structural integrity and appeal is not only rooted in this fiscal discipline, but the social values and the philosophy of peace through strength, and i believe this is as valid today as it has been for the last 35

years. some what have you believe, however, that the rise of the tea party and the outcome of last fall's election means conservatives stand for only one thing and nothing more, and that's reducing our deficit and shrinking government. and while that is absolutely vital and important, i strongly disagree that that's all there is. and i believe that most conservatives agree with that as well. [applause] as important as the spending cuts are coming and by the way, we need a lot more of them than what we are getting today. such a narrow political agenda is need for appropriate to our time nor is it politically conducive to a broad based appeal that will determine the future success. we are all about winning in 2012. so that's why this morning i am here to call on our movement, beginning here with you, you are

the all important cpac based, all 11,000 of you, to affirm our time tested winning platform that rests equally on all three legs. i believe in the coalition. i believe in this three legged stool that's the winning combination, because i believe that you are incredibly talented. i believe that you are filled with excitement. i believe that you are motivated for 2012. i believe, like you, that we need to win the triple crown of 2012, which is holding on to the house of representatives, when a conservative senate and winning the white house to triple crown. [applause] [cheering] i also believe we can do this.

i don't think this is standing up here and blowing smoke appear. i believe we can do this. for one thing, your all incredibly good-looking. [laughter] and i'm up here, i can see this. that fact alone, plus you're talented and very excited, that means to motivate us for 2012. i just want you to know, we can do this. we really can. we can't mess up though. and one thing that we have seen have been too frequently is the holder from the jobs of victory. have you been there? have you seen it? i have. it will not come it cannot, is to must not, it simply cannot have been for 2012. for 2012 would take the games we had and add it to them. that is how we will get our fiscal house in order. that is how we will stay grounded in our historic moral

value. that is how we will retain peace through strength. we live in a very different world today. and we have this tiny window of opportunity called 2012. because if we don't take back the white house and win the triple crown in 2012, that window of opportunity for repealing obamacare may slam shut. it may slam shut. and so just like the great people of new hampshire believe -- [cheering] -- live free or die. that needs to be our watchword as well. [applause] are we all? are we going to stand up? are we going to do this? is this our moment? [applause] is this our time? [applause] do you believe? do you believe? [applause] [cheering] do you believe! [applause] okay then, let's do it!

let's roll, 2012! thank you causey stand. thank you, all of you allow me to come. thank you, cpac. [applause] [cheering] [inaudible conversations] >> speakers of the seats cpac conference include new gingrich to talk about president obama's move to the political center. this is 40 minutes. >> -- stand firm for the principles we all believe in. you can't do better than senator mitch mcconnell. [applause]

[cheering] i am happy now to introduce you to david, the president of citizens united. previously he served as president and chief investigator for the center of government integrity, the government watchdog group that invested the continent and attrition. he served on numerous campaigns of conservative organizations and congressional investigations over the past 15 years. he previously served as chief investigator for the committee on government reform and oversight in the u.s. house of representatives where he led the campaign finance and chinese espionage investigation under chairman dan burton. bossie's work was recognized by cpac in 1999 when he was honored with a ralf rig and a word. he also came to a lot of people's attention after the supreme court issued its momentum citizens united case

id. [applause] many people still mischaracterized that case. the purpose of the case was to see to it that corporations who were not media corporations were on an even footing with corporations that were media corporations. it was a free-speech issue. and of course that was the case that caused president obama to denigrate the united states supreme court in last year's state of the union address. he is truly a champion of the conservative movement. please welcome david bossie of citizens united. ♪ [applause] ♪ four shrek >> thank you very much. collin, thank you for the kind introduction. collin was one of the patriots

who joined in with let freedom ring with an amicus brief in our case. so why thank you and a lot of people in this room and their organizations filed the case and was a wonderful victory for the first amendment and the conservative movement. it's nice to have picked up 63 seats in november. so we are -- and i am really enjoying the fact they are all mad at me. so it's nice. [laughter] i have a distinct honor and privilege today. we all followed the extraordinary career of our next speaker. he is a grandfather, scholar, college professor, best-selling author, filmmaker, congressman and leader of the 1994 republican revolution, the speaker of the house of representatives. new gingrich's resume and life experience or impressive and his

principled conservative leadership is desperately needed today more than ever. .. because newt gingrich did it. you always know where to stand. he is unwavering in his principles. he's the author of a contract

with america and he knows the commonsense conservative approach to government and the american people that the death really need to give us the majority in 1994 for the first time in 40 years. i have the honor to have partnered with speaker and calista gingrich on six films and just recently our first but together on ronald reagan. and he has made each one of those projects better with his knowledge and dedication to each project. two years ago, newt and calista coproduced with me ronald reagan's rendezvous with death to me. it is then caught the premiere documentary on the life of the 40th president died many of president reagan's former staff and cabinet members. by sheer citizens united on september 11 premiered a film with newt and calista called america at risk, a war with name. as we are coming on 20 years are

mixed in devastating attacks of september 11th, america at risk asked if the roots of radical islam. speaker gingrich is a man of big ideas. he is truly a one man think tank, continuously developing ways to make america better for future generations. america's faces a number of challenges in the years ahead. i hope and pray newt gingrich will be involved in answering the call to lead our country back to the shining city on the hill. fellow conservatives, please give a warm welcome to my friend in the 50th speaker of the house of representatives, newt and calista gingrich. [cheers and applause] klotzbach

[applause] [applause] ♪ [cheers and applause] me is not ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [cheers and applause] ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ [applause] >> thank you all. thank you very much. and delighted to be here. we have a great working relationship with dave and we have made a number of movies we are very proud of. what he did as citizens united with a lawsuit last year and to elect conservatives across the country is truly remarkable, so glad to be back. i also want to thank david king, while he has retired from that job, held together with chc and

cpac since 1983 and he deserves a big round of applause. [applause] now, as all of you have no, i almost always start by going back to the very second cpac when conservative conservatives seem to last a way and when ronald reagan recently on five days came here in bed that we have to have pulled colors, not pale pastels. he laid out a policy ocean a short time defeated the soviet empire, relaunched the american economy and rebuild americans with american exceptionalism. 20 years after that i came to cpac is the first republican speaker in 40 years and outlined a series of very old ideas, welfare reform so people would go to work in school instead of being dependent on the government, a balance budget, tax cut for the first time in 16

years to stimulate economic growth. now i'm back. here we are 16 years later. what is happening? two stories from yesterday. the germans are buying the new york stock exchange. in fact, the new york exchange is bigger than the stock exchange said they will have 16% and mark said major control. it is a fundamental blow to our capacity to create jobs. in fact what is truly astonishing is to terminate germany is a country pays 50% more for manufacturing we do. you earn more money and germany may have the lowest unemployment rate in 1982. so it's not always cheap labor. sometimes it's just terribly bad government. let's look at the case. the government is pro-jobs at the government is

pro-manufacturing. the german government is pro-export. and now it's up at government. why are we falling tide? fight the new york stock exchange taken over by frankfurt? why are we in y arena masklike why do we have 9% unemployment? the obama administration is anti-jobs, and taste all business on anti-manufacturing, purpura crack, pro-axis. what do you think is going to happen? [applause] my favorite political governing slogan for the next 20 years is two plus two equals four. simple, basic, honest facts. if you want to kill jobs come you can and democrat prove it all the time. now the second big story from yesterday. yesterday homeland security secretary napolitano's that we have the most heightened threat since 9/11, that after 10 years there are more terrorists in the

united states who are indigenous terrorists recruited through the internet and at any time in the last decade and yet this is the administration. we did a movie called america at risk, the word with no name. this is an administration that doesn't have the courage to tell us the truth. [applause] i know i would get attacked, so i'm somebody whose nickname is jihads jane that passes in court to be a terrorist, it would e. inappropriate. one pattern might have letter to that. when you have a nigerian who trains in yemen who arrived over detroit on christmas day seeking to blow up an airplane over the neighborhood to get collateral damage. but in a pakistani who listed the judge and the judge says huckabee swore in a new u.s.? and since you are my enemies. i laid. the judge was suitably shocked. when you have a man jumped up at

fort hood with a card in man's wallet that says warrior of all, gillis out dark, kills 13 americans and was 33 and the president of the united states and chief of staff of the army urged people not to jump to conclusions. do not generalize. when he was mayor bloomberg after they pick up a car bomb in the pakistan in times square, his first comments on television was less not unto judgment. it could've been someone someone opposed to obamacare. don't you know how willfully deliberately you have the hype from reality to assume that after thousands of radical islam is terrorist suicide bombers that your first thought is somebody supposed to health care? i mean, this would be a psychological program. [applause]

the obama administration is not terrorism, ron and iran, robin hezbollah and being wrong and that my national security is an enormously dangerous thing. [applause] but the president remains relatively high because the media loves him. as one liberal analysts said, my leg shakes thinking of him. "time" magazine just a cover on reagan's 100 birthday, why obama loves reagan. now, i want you to know first of all my leg doesn't shake. and i want the elite media to know something. i knew ronald reagan. [laughter] clap back [applause] i began working with ronald

reagan in 1970 or when i first ran for congress and i hate to tell this story friends at msnbc and elsewhere, barack obama is no ronald reagan. [cheers and applause] [applause] [applause] however, the media wants us to be responsible. the media wants us to be bipartisan and. the media wants us to bring a new positive tone to washington. so i'm going to risk shocking you. in the tradition of ronald reagan's 19751975 proposal, i proposal, i want to suggest that

cpac do something. old. i miss it by the way, for those liberals who think 2010 was the peak, the fact that we have 2000 more richer string they share. i'm going to tell them no, 2010 was the appetizer. 2012 is the entrée. [cheers and applause] [applause] so what i'm going to say so bold. i'm going to ask you to hear me out before you react. i want us to offer a president obama the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at cpac and 2012 if he earns it. let me explain. many people write about moving to the senate. many people cite ill clinton is moving the center. just as with reagan, i was

actually there. clinton signed welfare reform and two out of three people that either went to work or went to school. clinton signed the first tax cut in 16 years and the fire left pointed out it included the largest capital gains tax cut in history designed to create jobs and unemployment went down from 5.4 to 4.0 burst and then i was the largest single step towards a balanced budget. we kept spending down to 2.9% a year for four years, the smallest increase since calvin coolidge in the 1920s. bob livingston had a huge spending cut bill, the first of 1981. john k. sake offered a series of changes made in the first part balanced budget in two generations. the house gop move fast. in fiscal 1995, the democrats devastated with $164 billion. we brought it down a little bit

the first year, but the second year we had it down to $22 billion from 164. the following year we had a $69 billion surplus in our third budget that we were in charge of. over a four-year period, we paid off $559 billion in federal debt by controlling spending and increasing economic growth. [applause] the number one job two days to create jobs. america only works when americans are working and nothing would do more to balance the budget than to go from 9.2% back down to 4% unemployment, taking 5% of the american people off of unemployment, off of medicaid, putting them back with the job, paying taxes, giving their family a future. [cheers and applause] and let me emphasize something the republicans all too often

and conservatives all too often fail to be direct to talk about. at a time when we have 45% black teenage unemployment in january, that is not acceptable to anyone in america and we should be the people who drive for policy changes so every young american can get a job no matter what the ideological biases. [applause] and i'll be candid. we did not need a deficit commission. we needed a jobs commission that top phone with people who create jobs here at i'm sick and tired of congressional hearings were people never created a job show up to explain their theory of doing something they've never done. [applause] i'm going to outline two large strategies that will move us towards job creation. an american energy plan and an environmental solutions agency

to replace the environmental protection agency. [cheers and applause] but first, let me but as how president obama could move to the center, could be bipartisan and could be invited to keep cpac. there are seven types -- which is convinced every liberal of what they've always feared. but if there are seven steps on the center for obama. first, signed the repeal of obamacare. [cheers and applause] i want to make a point to my news media friends. 58% of the american people the most recent poll favor repeal of obamacare. 50% out to be the center. i mean, where's the center it's not the majority of americans? and offers some people the

center is the faculty club at harvard or "the new york times" editorial board, but that is not actually correct. so the president would like to truly be part of the american middle, signed the repeal. two, signed tort reform for doctors. he said the other night you'd like to do it. but let them do it. [applause] for congress has passed a son taxis and other reforms the strongest path will toward reform bill and let him become president by explaining he didn't mean what he said because of the city said he would've been it because it could mean because that's what he did a trailer so we should of understanding that something else forgot to say because the teleprompter wasn't working on its last fall. [laughter] [applause] three, signed the permanent repeal of the death tax. [cheers and applause]

78% of the american people favor repeal the death tax. that is consistently a large majority for the last 30 years and i was eight "the new york times" to cbs news and even daringly to our friends at msnbc, if 70% is at the center of the country, where are you going to find it and what are you doing when you get there? forth, signing new hyde amendment so no tax funds abortion in the united states. [cheers and applause] says, signed a new poll drafted conservative budget act to control spending and move to a balanced budget. [applause] six, signed a law to decisively control the order now.

[cheers and applause] southend, sign a 10th amendment implementation act returning power from washington to this state into the people they are. this is not about shipping it from washington to atlanta or washington to sacramento. the amendment does and the people thereof. so the power to go to local people, local communities and then they defend what they want to get the state government. and that fact should include -- [applause] block granting medicaid so that states can control the costs and improve the quality without interference from washington bureaucrat. [applause] now, i hope you would agree with me that a president obama who does the 17th would've come come to the center in the desert the invitation to be the keynote speaker next year.

[applause] i would not bet a lot on that ticket, but now, think about my two major policy proposals in the context of that program. first, we need an american energy policy. an american solutions we discovered of the last two years unoffending anchors and believe we need an american energy policy to create jobs in the united states. 79% we need an american energy policy to keep the money here rather than in china. 79% believe in american energy policy national security reasons. i matter how u.s. the question is consistently comes out better than four to one. so when the center of the american politics come in the face of bipartisanship doing what the american people want and having an american energy policy. [applause] now by contrast of what you have from the obama administration is a war against american industry. they just can't help themselves.

in the state of the union of the time are facing riesel oil o-oscar what does the president what to do? raise tax is on oil and gas. not in saudi arabia, not in iran. so, we were at the reagan 100th anniversary, a wonderful event at the reagan library which just had a renewing open that it marvelous if you get a chance to visit simi valley is workable. we had lunch with george schultz and i was asking them about what is happening in egypt nowadays. he finally said to me, people collaborate back to 1923. the very first oil shock and the liberally by the companies. you look at ronald reagan's state of the state address in 1974, where he called for an american embassy. schultz looked at us and said it makes you wonder how many times we have to be hit over the hunt with a two by four to figure out this serious.

[applause] cliff may of the foundation of the defense for democracy did you know, living in the communist era said capitalists will sell us the rope to hang them. he said it never occurred to london that we would give them the money to buy the rope with. [laughter] and for 30 years, we followed an energy policy which picks saudi is richer, radiance richer, venezuelans, and subsidize madrassas across a planet teaching hate and subsidize people who want to come and kill us. for 30 years we have the worst possible national security policy on energy and it's time we stop it and it's time to pass an aggressively pro-american jobs, aggressively pro-american energy. [applause] in 2008 when gasoline was up $4 a gallon, american said drill now, payless, which upped the cost of wall street was actually

working in the league for wall street collapsed, john mccain was ahead by three points and republicans were ahead by five. the left couldn't survive in a world where we had to curse to say, why don't we find american oil and why don't we find american gods and why do we have the next building boom in the united states, not in dubai. and why do we make sure that terrorists are not of money? that ought to be our approach. let's do it now. first of all, reopen louisiana. either way, this administration with utter total hypocrisy said they would lift the quarantine, but then fed by the way there's a new regulatory policy and we don't issue any of the new regulations. so they have effectively stopped everything they promised last fall they would allow to happen again. governor jindal wants it to happen. they understand that $80,000 a year jobs aren't on unavailable in the united states and the understand shipping the reef to egypt in the congo because they are more politically stable than

the united states is not a good sign for future. sign for future. sign for future. only state, but if the state wants to go and find oil in gas and wants to create more jobs than that they do much to help the american balance payment and keep the money here, let let them do it now. [applause] we should end the environmental protection agency's work in american oil and gas. for example, shall one in 2006, five years ago, it leads to allow them to ask lord to beaufort a off alaska. $3 billion later, the epa has refused to allow them to move outward in the announced last week or stopping. this wasn't the alaska wilderness area. this is an area legally open for

restoration in which the environmentalist that the government in environments outside the government deliberately conspired to stop and the company and creating american oil and american gas in the united states in a way which we can only be helpful to the saudis and the arabian and i for one entire to say we had to crippler companies on behalf of people overseas. you don't see any losses over there because i don't frankly allow it. you're the situation where every time we stop american come with strength and our enemies than we can or an economy and this is a perfect case study. [applause] we should also stop the environmental protection agency's efforts to cripple the development of gas admin shell. we have technology that lets us go down and doesn't feed, reach out as much as four miles horizontally. we cannot produce commercially available natural gas from shale. we have an 1100 year supply.

in the answer is you don't know what happen and therefore your epa is going to protect you from the possibilities of 328 years from now, something bad might happen. let me tell you, something that is happening this morning with other people can't find a job because the government is killing the industry. [applause] we need to develop the site as clean coal pilot projects to prove the concept that we can use coal because we have more cool than saudi arabia has energy and soil and it is utterly, totally foolish to say the united states is not going to aggressively develop clean coal. the department of energy promised in 2003 they would have a plan to buy 2008. the event to need it to death and now hope to have won by 2016 that the current correction, the chinese will build, patented and

licensed technologies worldwide faster than our bureaucracy in washington could daguerreotype to issue the permit to try. it is fundamentally wrong and we should cut through the red tape and we should maximize the ability of burn electricity industry and are coal industry develop new plans. clap knock them for example, the obama administration a few weeks ago reversed a permit that had been given for homeland in west virginia because the new epa bureaucrats decide if they were wrong. had you in best buy site you create jobs? had even a sense of energy production but nevertheless antibusiness bureaucrat could in fact take away every single thing you've done? so they had to reverse the decision to go back to keeping their word and create energy for the rest of us. they should streamline the nuclear regulatory us to go

enable us to build power plants. there is something fundamentally wrong. [applause] i received my environmental friends, if you really wanted to get carbon out of the atmosphere of a enough from france it would take 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide. they would pay that is not the right doors. there is never a rates pollution if it is aleutian because then the economy would grow, free enterprise at work and that would be wrong. so there was one of technology that doesn't exist or could exist sunday if only your patient long enough in the meantime ride a bicycle to prove you're a peach tree because they won't permit you to do anything else. very two things at nuclear power. one is we should dramatically coetzer and streamline the regulatory process. but to come as a whole new generation of nuclear power plants that are very, very if that should not come under the regulatory design for huge,

giant, multibillion-dollar plan. we can go to much more nuclear power and have a very big job creation technology. [applause] we should also insist on flex feel cars to want to say to some of my friends that i think are confused about the issue, frankly. the person a first-come intention of the former or the cia covers this should be seen as a national security issue. purcell went to a flex fuel car model years ago. the companies by the a will testify they don't know how to do it are building the cars in brazil. they said okay, we'll learn how to do it. it cost us than putting on a seatbelt. and the fact is it allows the consumer to do it. it's not about dictating what you want to do. it's about giving a range of choices that what you want to do. brazil today is totally energy independent by a combination of

offshore discovery, flexeril cars in the use of sugar-based ethanol. and they don't pay a penny to saudi arabia. they don't pay a penny to iran or iraq or venezuela. [applause] we had to be clear about this. let the consumers have the opportunity to choose what they want to do in most of them can be economically rational. it's a step towards us getting away from relying on foreign fuels. finally, i do think because i'm a futurist and i believe in the future like ronald reagan. i believe in investing in developing it to elegies if the investments are made private sector without picking winners and losers solar matters, when matters, but the truth is the next 20 years about what will will matter the most is oil, gas, coal and nuclear because they will send only statistically win the bulk of the supply. each move forward on every

front, not at the most successful friends fluid around for a better future that may or may not come faster enough. in order to have an american energy policy, we need to replace the environmental protection agency is a fundamentally different or mental solution. [applause] for my friends in the media, i want to emphasize her place is not about terri down, destroy, eliminate walkaway, thought to corporate interests and all that baloney. this is a different question. and i wrote a book called contract with outlining the model of the green conservatism. the question is, could you in fact develop a better solution that awash in today's command-and-control, top-down your credit regulatory litigation model? i believe in by the way 75% of the american people believe that relying on science, to allergy,

markets and incentives is a better future with better solutions than relying on eurocrats, trial lawyers come the litigation and regulation. can we do it better? i want to replace, not reformed epa because epa is made up of self-selected bureaucrats who are anti-american jobs, anti-american business, anti-state governments, anti-local control and i don't think you can reeducate. you shall love and to go home, get a college job, write memoirs, what i did before the revolution and go on with what we're doing. [applause] i don't think the epa bureaucrats are dedicated to washington top-down bureaucratic control by litigation regulation are going to learn a new dance in a new approach and a new model. what we need is -- and by the way this is doubly true because obama went to use epa control carbon of the camera control all

the non-help the economy to match his control over the health economy through obamacare. the two of them together such a fundamental threat to freedom in this country by centralizing power in washington d.c. a new environmental agency i believe would do a better job of protecting both in higher mint in the economy. first of all they are straightforward. localism when possible. i believe local people who live there may have a higher value for their urban. a washington bureaucrat who has never visited their town or been in their state. i believe that state governments can be very reliable partners in that there have to be a cooperative attitude from washington seeking to work with the state, not a dictatorial attitudes against other states the limits of some bureaucrat here based on people. [applause] i believe that incentives, innovators and much bernoulli's can solve environmental problems and improve the environment

better than bureaucrats commemorate the leaders litigators. the new entire middle ages he should be communities, states and industries have arteries, not adversaries and solving problems with win-win approaches. the terminal solutions agency should look for new science companies to elegies and new approaches to get our energy, more jobs in a better environment simultaneously. as an american, i reject the idea that you have to choose one or the other. we have never done that in our history. we have always believed we can create a better future and in my mind a better future is a healthy environment and a healthy economy and help the local control within a constitutional system of a limited federal government and we americans fail to do that. [applause] i taught in the second part a 40 years ago. i was director interdisciplinary program wester to college and

provide a contract with your agenda to bring conservatives. i believe you can let nature be conservative. you can love the environment and also want american energy and american jobs. i want to close by asking you to do this. how your congressman and your senators. ask them to introduce a genuine american energy plan to cut through all the red tape and all the litigation and get us to energy and jobs this year for american national security for the american economy and better future and urge them to introduce the past an american solution -- environmental solutions he gets here and then we'll give the president a choice. they really want the president veto every good idea that comes up l.? 40 like to work with us in a cooperative bipartisan commonsense, centrist majority supported by the american people, doing the conservatives found things that the american people want in the washington

elite. let's let him choose. i don't actually personally believe he will make it next year. but it's a goal. we are all having a good time, why shouldn't he get to have a good time, too quiet thank you all very, very much. [applause] [applause] [applause] >> we also heard from donald trump who said he is serious to considering a run for president. this is the teen -- 15 minute period.

[inaudible conversations] mus not >> with apologies to my better looking cousin, what a fantastic teacher it weimar pierre is. [applause] when i served as the solicitor general texas coming at the the great honor of fighting alongside wayne before the u.s. cyprian court, defending the individual right to keep and bear arms and we won a landmark decision, protecting all of her second amendment right. you know, in the wake of the arizona tragedy, a great many in the media mike d'antoni about stability. and it seems stability only

applies to those that are not on the left. i don't know how many of you saw "the new york times" wire story this morning about this gathering. breaking news, band of lunatics and rates washington, terrorizes women, children and innocent government eurocrat. and then of course we remember president barack obama on the campaign trail when he quoted sean connery from the untouchables. if they are putting a knife, i'm putting it done. that is the chicago way. and come to think of it, that quote would've very much pleased her last speaker. it's the only time in history president obama never supported second amendment right. i'm very pleased now to upload a

surprise speaker not on the gas. to introduce our surprise speaker is our direct to, least of us well and she is here to introduce donald trump. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> good afternoon. well, i am pleased to report this is the largest crowd we have ever had an eager anticipation of her next speaker, we have overflow rooms filled, so we'll get to it. whenever we are preparing a speaker with an introducer, we like to find people that have some sort of connection, something in common. in this case, the next speaker and i both have very iconic

hair. [laughter] during this time in america, when everyone is desperately trying to find or keep their job, there's a long line of people that sign up for the chance to be fired. next speaker. he quite honestly need no introduction whatsoever. donald trump is one of the most successful businessmen in the world, and multiple best-selling author, creator and star of the one of the popular television franchises company committed fiscal conservative and a proud american in his recent interview with ron ti series we saw this as a believes this great country is worth fighting for and someone who was speaking about tossing his tag in the ring for the 2012 presidential nomination. [applause] of course, that journey must begin with all of you today. please join me in welcoming mr. donald trump.

♪ ♪ >> what a nice group. beautiful. thank you very much. great to be here. >> you are hired. this is beautiful. let me begin by thanking cpac for the opportunity to address so many of you today. it's a wonderful forum and an honor to be here. thank you very much. while i am not at this time a candidate for the presidency, i

will decide by june whether or not it will become one. and i will tell you to reason that i'm thinking about it is that the united states has become the whipping post for the rest of the world. the world is treating us without respect. they are not treating us properly. america -- [applause] america today is missing quality leadership in foreign countries have quickly realized this. it is for this reason that the united states is becoming the laughingstock of the world. whether we like it or don't like it, that is what's happening. i do with people from china. i.t. with people from mexico. they cannot believe what they are getting away with. i have said on numerous occasions that countries like china, like india, south korea, mexico and the opec nations view

our leaders as weak and in effect give and have repeatedly taken advantage of them to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year when they talk about raising your taxes, they raise the taxes on some of these countries they are taking advantage of the united states. [applause] over the years i participated in the many battles and have really almost come out very very victorious every single time. i've beat many people and companies and have won many wars. i feared and intelligently earned billions of dollars which in a sense was a scorecard to knowledge needs of our abilities. during my lifetime -- a little bit different from what you've been hearing. during my lifetime, i've always

been told a person of great accomplishment and achievement cannot become a politician or run for political office because there are too many enemies, both very smart and not so smart strewn along this highway to success. people have been in wars -- and this is were. life is pleasant, but it can be more. people have been in wars, even the most successful leave themselves open to great criticism from the many they have beaten and those that have watched the battles. the fact is, this theory of a very successful person running for office is really tested because most successful people don't want to be scrutinized to refuse to notice what happens. if you see it, that's what happens. and this is why we don't have the kinds of people that we shouldn't have running for office.

unfortunately, this is the kind of person that the country needs and they needed now. we don't have time to wait 25 years. this country is in serious trouble and we need it now. [applause] our current president came out of nowhere. in fact, the people who went to school with them never saw them. they don't know who it is. [applause] with more track record and i will tell you it's got nothing to criticize. wonderful guy. it's a nice man, but there is no record. he didn't go on wars, battles, didn't beat this one, have enemies all over the place. nobody knew who the he was. even our president. he is our president.

but he is our president. "businessweek" magazine, which is now bloomberg business week said said in a vote of donald trump was the world's most competitive business president. i don't know if that's true or not, but with no case be number two on warren buffett be number three, steve ford stated that i was one of the greatest entrepreneurs in the history of free trade. that's an important one because we don't have free trade. we don't have free trade. we don't have fair trade and i am a fair trade reliever. i love open market, but not when china is manipulating currency. not when all the other fact tours have taken place.

[cheers and applause] and i can tell you, i am a big buyer of products. they build holdings in other things. and so many of those products unfortunately come from china and other countries, but china. we are rebuilding china. you go to china right now they are building the biggest airports in the world, the best everything. and in doing it, because we buy so much of the product. and the reason we buy their product is because their currency is so low and they have it artificially so low that it makes it almost impossible for companies to compete. i tell you the one thing that's very important. our companies make a better product. it's very important to know we a better product. [applause]

was steve "forbes" and the disney weak statement continuing to shape the united states is an right now, we need a competitive person. we need a highly competent person or we are going to have very, very serious trouble very quickly. [applause] ism on numerous occasions that we should watch china and opec because by the way, worse than china, worse than everyone, opec. they are truly ripping us. and you know, i wrote it down is coming over here today -- would've many people in the cars cars that my gosh, look at that. he didn't use the word gosch, but i'm going to use it. $4.54 a gallon for gas. it is going to go much higher, folks. get used to it because we have

nobody the cause of opec. they are only there because of us. we protect them. we have nobody that cause up opec and say, that price better get lower and up better get lower fat. we have nobody that does that. [applause] they have a free reign. they have a free reign and the amazing. the other day there is a small lake in the alaska pipeline. i said watch, opec will announce an increase. they did. they announced an increase. any time there's a problem. egypt -- vehicle situation in egypt, people in the square. opec announces an increase. anytime there's a problem they announced the nobody says anything. nobody says it's unwarranted. anyway, so you have to watch opec. you have to tell opec, those

prices are coming down and they are coming down fast and we're not paying $7, $8, $9. in a year or two for nine to prepare that eye. it sure is you are sitting there because we have nobody to speak to. how about this morning i am leaving new york and germany is find the new york stock exchange. can you believe it? i thought he was kidding. i said is this april fools' day? germany, a major company in germany is buying the new york stock exchange. how about the smaller pirate? you know that doesn't pertain to us. a simple with that the. give me one good admiral and a couple of good ships, we blast them out of the water so fast. [cheers and applause] so i have a reputation for telling it like it is. i am known for my candor. i've had a lot of great victories and i may be willing to put that to her.

i mean, frankly i wish there was a candidate that i would be fantastic because i love what i'm doing. in fact, at the great club that 15 minutes away. [booing] by the way, ron paul cannot collect dead, i'm sorry to say. [cheers and applause] [laughter] [applause] indianola dallas? i like ron paul. he think he is a good guy, but honestly he has zero chance of getting the lack of it. you have to win an election. and i can tell you this.

if i were out and i win, this country will be respect it again. this country will be respect to begin. i can tell you that. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] i graduated from the wharton school of finance, which is the best business school in my opinion. i graduated from the wharton school of finance as well as military school. both of those educational background that come into play to shape my personal and business relationship with what i do enjoy to it with. their tactics and strategies involved in any form of leadership and i am well acquainted with both.

i am also well acquainted with winning and that's what this country needs now, winning. [cheers and applause] just very briefly, i am pro-life. [cheers and applause] i am against gun control. [cheers and applause] i agree with your previous speaker and i will fight to end obama cared and replace it. [cheers and applause] i will replace it with something that makes sense for people in business and not bankrupt the country. [cheers and applause] if i decide to run, i will not

be raising taxes. [cheers and applause] we will be taken in hundreds of billions of dollars from other countries that are screwing a. [cheers and applause] we will be creating vast numbers of dead good jobs -- thank you very much. and we will rebuild our country so that we can be proud. our country will be great again. thank you very much. it's an honor. thank you. viewsonic ♪ >> thank you very much.

♪ ♪ ♪

because of the 24/7 news cycle, reporters are constantly asking us questions all day long. by the time you get to the briefing room at noon, they've been asking questions since 4:00 a.m.