talented embassy team in three principle areas. first the defense and the security relationship between the two countries. second, commercial and economic ties, and third, shared values, particularly the shared values of good government and civil rights for all. ..

general petraeus, who explained the critically important responsibilities that are check allies are carrying outside eyesight, day by day, with their u.s. partners in afghanistan. the checks are also a staunch friend of israel and a strong supporter of u.s. policy towards iran. they are one of our very best allies in europe on those issues and across-the-board. in our own neighborhood, the czech republic is a leading advocate within the european union for countries like georgia, ukraine and moldova through the eastern partnership initiative. elsewhere from cuba to burma to belarus to north korea, checks are champions of human rights. we in the embassy in prague are proud to work with our chat partners on these issues.

looking ahead to the future of our defense and strategic partnership that we are broadening security cooperation, developing an approach that goes beyond any single narrow focus to one with multiple areas of specialized cooperation with a tax exile, the checks are world-class strategic partners in areas ranging from helicopters to chemical biological radiological and nuclear mitigation to prt's, provincial reconstruction teams. in the economic and commercial area, embassy fraud has actively advocated for american business during my tenure. we have an open door for u.s. firms and i have met with dozens of american companies from the very largest to the smallest. when they have concerns in the czech republic we vigorously work to involve them engaging all the way up to the highest levels of government if necessary. i've also encouraged czech

investment in the u.s., traveling with government officials and czech businesses to scout business opportunities here that will generate good, high-paying jobs in the united states. in our commercial and economic work, we have particularly emphasized the civil nuclear cooperation. the sub to have six operating nuclear reactors and are planning an expansion worth up to $27.5 billion, one of the largest opportunities for u.s. businesses of its kind anywhere in the world. at westinghouse commodious competitor wins that bid it will mean an estimated 9000 new, good jobs in the united states -- across the united states. to support that bid we have adopted a whole of government approach here in the united states and with embassy prague to establish a broad, civil nuclear strategic ownership between our two countries. so from fostering the relations

between u.s. and abroad rad facilities to making regulatory exchanges, to working together to improve nuclear safety, our two nations are building a model civil nuclear relationship for the 21st century. my third area of emphasis has been the shared values that bind our two countries together. czech and slovak national aspirations in the 20th century were first realized by the pittsburgh and washington declarations, signed right here in the united states after world war i by president wilson's great friend and czechoslovakia's first president, a revered name in my home growing up. thomas masher it. the united states helped liberate czechoslovakia from the nazis, supported against communism and transform the goals of the revolution into reality. i have carried that message of

friendship the length and breadth of the country, visiting him as 20 cities and reasons outside of prague and just about six months on the job. my message is one of warm friendship, but also candor. i supported the initiative said those in the czech government, the opposition, ngos and the czech republic who are working for a good government against corruption. i believe we are building a model and proud of how to respectfully but forcefully engage on this issues. we have also worked with the czech government to promote equal rights and opportunities for all czech citizens irrespective of origin or faith including the roma appeared my presence in prague is the child of a checklist about the extent of nazis persecution by itself a powerful message in the night against extremism and for human rights, working with the talented interagency team that

embassy prague is taken every opportunity to engage with the check people and their government to advance our common goals and values. i am so, so honored to be asked to represent our country and our government. not in chair, members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. i welcome any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. before you go on to ambassador ricciardone come i want to recognize and understand the ambassador from the czech republic to the united states is in the audience, so not to recognize him. very nice to have you join us. i don't know if there any other members of the diplomatic corps here, but welcome to all of you. so, ambassador ricciardone. >> man in chair, members of the committee commentary on a trip here before you today as president of him as nominee as ambassador to the republic of turkey, having a dimension served in that capacity as recess appointees this past

january. i'm grateful to the president and secretary clinton for their trust and confidence in me and with me today is my wife and her partner, marie whom i married in new hampshire almost four decades ago and my partner throughout her foreign service adventures in turkey on monday for i ran in everywhere. so she's with me and our chatters were unable join us, but we all have family connections to turkey and a great fondness for the country. during may 33 year career in foreign service had the pleasure put just having served in turkey three times into the spirit of it to serve turkey's transformation into a more democratic and more open and more economically vibrant modern state and as a player with growing influence on the rural stage. throughout this change and development has been one

constant and that has been turkey's continued commitment to its partnership with the united states in the nato alliance. it's also a member of the g20 now having one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. and noting turkeys history as a majority muslim nation and as a secular democracy that respects the rule of law, president obama cited turkey's critical role helping to shape the mutual understanding and stability not only in its neighborhood but around the world. if confirmed it will continue to do everything i can to reinforce turkish-american cooperation and support of our common goals which are rooted in the security alliance and our shared democratic values. for decades, turkey and the united states have cooperated intensely to promote regional stability, including by countering terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, resolving regional conflicts, propounding energy security, expanding trade, investment and economic

development and essential and integral to all of those, strengthening democracy, human rights and the rule of law. several such strategic rarities emerge in the cases in particular and immediate consequence, including iraq and afghanistan. the quest for peace between israel and all its neighbors and iran's evident recruit of nuclear weapons. other conflicts, as you've mentioned, madam chair, with historic antecedents require no less joint attention and cooperation including the unresolved issues with cyprus and the normalization of relations with armenia. i've been privileged to serve during the arab spring in which you strive to enrich turkish support from the native role in libya for a successful transition to democracy in egypt and collaboration with my colleague and friend next door in syria to pressure the regime in syria to cease its brutal repression and heed the will of its people.

just as the turkish government has played an important role in promoting these political transitions, its government and private sector also keen to support economic development in egypt and tunisia that are so critical to long-term stability in the region by increasing their trade and investment in those countries. wherever possible, turkey is a government and turkish firms are looking for partnerships with american firms. while we share many goals with turkey, one of the most important countering global terrorism and networks in turkey has been one of our strongest partners. just less than turkey's security officials arrested an alleged al qaeda cell that was putting to bomb western interests in turkey, including the united states embassy. we support turkey some form of security object is of defeating the terrorist violence which the pkk continues to perpetrate genocide to the deaths of over 30,000 turks since the 1980s. we strongly support turkey's

efforts to improve the human rights and economic situation for the kurds and their democratic participation as whole citizens and the race also two other committee needs and other groups in turkey. as the united states maintained its long-standing support for turkey's aspiration to join the european union we will continue to press forward reforms required. it is important to note that turkish citizens themselves are demanding further progress on the rule of law can will certainly including freedom of speech and religious freedom. in my return to turkey has been my privilege to be with the heads of each of the religious minorities, the ancient jewish community of istanbul, his whole country all holiness holiness bartholomew who i met a couple decades ago with then first lady secretary clinton and then again two weeks ago the head of the theory on a church in the head of the armenian church as well as well as the baha'i community

leader. he was support the transparent and inclusive constitutional reform process to strength in turkey's democracy. we regard freedom of expression essential to democracy and believe the reform process offers a unique opportunity to strengthen protections afforded to journalists, nongovernmental organizations and minorities. the president and secretary of establish economic cooperation with turkey as a strategic priority and have emphasized the importance of supporting american firms and promoting turkish-american trade and investment. during the presidency april 2000 meeting with turkish president keough hopefully it's a great two the level of our already strong clinical and military relations. so turkey is a leading focus of the president's new export initiative to double u.s. exports globally in five years. it's been a special privilege to return over the past six months to strengthen the communications and the friendship between our

two peoples in all fields, private as well as official diverse. including fields of education, science and health are dying of this committee and the senate has strongly supported public heath and i try to make a special effort to communicate with the turkish people and bring private american groups and turks together. i believe in increasing context of communications between americans and turks must be a primary means of advancing or interest some of the issues we face together today. madam chair, ranking member, senator, if confirmed continue my service as ambassador as in all other posts in the past the past i will trust your support will trust your support and advice that of your colleagues and constituents who are interested in the interest of the united states as it is in turkey. can you make so much for this hearing. >> thank you, ambassador. >> thank you, madam chair. madam chair, senator lugar, i'm

really honored to appear before you today and i'm grateful for the trust and confidence placed in me by president saddam and secretary clinton renominating me to research as the united states ambassador to the theory and arab republic at a time when it is more critical than other that our voice be heard clearly by the syrian regime and more importantly they this hearing people themselves. under the president's recess appointments i've been working in syria since late january. i have to say it has not been an easy job, but the strategic stakes and the strategic opportunities for us that we have in syria now for quite germanic and there is a huge important story about the struggle for human dignity now underway in syria. i arrived in syria about a month before the process started. in the past five months, those

protests have grown slowly in size and now extend across all of syria. the protesters demand respect for their basic right, freedom of speech, freedom to march peacefully and they demand an end to corruption and above all they demand that their government treat them with dignity. i want to emphasize here we talk about the arab spring in washington. the key word is dignity, treating people with dignity. the government's response has been brutal. it has been outrageous. nearly two 2000 people have been killed at the syrian security forces and thousands more arrested and held in barbaric conditions. one cannot cast but admiration for the protesters courage and also the ingenuity and they have stayed generally peaceful despite all its common beatings

and the constant risk of arrest and torture. and my five months there, sorry, six months i have seen two principal tasks in front of me. first to insist to the syrian officials and to convince them that opening more space for the syrian people to express them selves is vital for the credibility of those officials, the credibility of that government and force syria more largely. there have been a few small positive steps taken by the government. they have released many political prisoners. they have allowed some meetings by the political opposition. however, as i said in general, their behavior has been a true shows in their recent actions that we've read about in the newspaper these days only underline again that the syrian government is unwilling to leave

the democratic transition at the syrian people themselves demand. my second in damascus is to work with the syrian opposition. i've spent enormous amounts of time discussing what time their ideas for the future and discussing what done the kinds of questions that other serious in the international community will ask about them. it's really important not to give syrian in here and to amplify their voices, especially when the international media is barred from syria. i have been trying to draw the attention of the syrian regime in the intention that the international community because of the legitimate grievances the syrian people have with their government. the syrian people want to be heard.

i wish the members of this committee could have seen how it is the asked protesters were to have a chance to talk to the american ambassador. the crisis in syria however is not about the united states directly. as i said, it offers us opportunities to promote reese decked for our principles and our ideals. the syrian crisis offers us the opportunity to eventually reinforce stability and peace in the middle east. the syrians must resolve the crisis. the manner in which the crisis is resolved has to be a syrian one. my job is to help establish the syrian activists and syrian thinkers, syrian people generally to develop and

organize the political transition that must occur in the area to be stable again. syria is 23 million people are already thinking about what happened when a site is no longer president of syria. i believe that we in the syrian people sharing a vision of what it could he end up in a democratic country where governments are based on consent of the government. a unified intolerant continent where arabs and kurds, sunnis and allies, christians and druze see themselves as serious as first and they celebrate syria's rich cultural diversity. a strong country at peace with its neighbors and exercising a stabilizing influence in the

region, a strong country that plays the responsible role in the broader international community and the country that does not support iranian effort to destabilize the region or give support to terrorist groups like hezbollah. as the president said on july 31st come in syria will be a better place when the democratic transition goes forward. i and my team in damascus, my colleagues at the department of state and throughout the u.s. government and most importantly the syrian people are working to make a vision a reality. madam chair, thank you for this opportunity to address the committee and i look forward to responding to questions at the appropriate time. >> thank you all very much for your testimony. as i indicated in introducing ambassador eisen and

ricciardone, you are both recess appointments, said really like to begin this afternoon by asking you each to address the situation that required your recess appointment and why you believe the senate should confirm me this year and i'll ask you to begin, mr. eisen. >> madam chair, as you noted, the czechs are some of our closest allies in the world and ambassador was needed after a hiatus to work on critical issues like afghanistan, iran, israel and the potential $27.5 billion nuclear export opportunity for thousands of u.s. jobs. it's my understanding that my nomination was held over can parents about a personnel matter handled by my office when they were in the white house. we attempted to resolve those

concerns, but were unable to do so in given the important security and economic issues on which we work with the czechs, the president determined that a recess appointment was appropriate and indeed necessary since my arrival and probably have made strong progress on all those issues come afghanistan, iran and israel, nuclear contract in many other important areas in the relationship. those remain as vital as ever and i believe that progress, the energy that not only i have put in, but the entire embassy team in crowd together have put an end the good work that day and we have done i think is the best case for the continued presence of an ambassador and the czech republic. >> mr. richard armey. >> madam chair, as you pointed out yourself, turkey is a

pivotal country at a critical place geographically and very tense moments throughout the region has influenced the mallet those issues that are strategic concerns to the united states. moreover internally is going through a hugely important and delivery process of change. the turkish people deciding their own direction. and they do it to us as they go through this. they care about what we think. we have an extraordinary talented team that i found on arrival in january. one outburst in return mission and the heavy lifting diplomacy everyday. the fact is having an ambassador present improves the united states the united states access and ability to speak every day with people to talk of government in different institutions in the military as

well as civilian thin with the public in a way that cannot be done. so i'm very grateful that the president appointed and grateful to have been there in particular throughout this period of the arab springs going on in the region where turkey has swung in and help play to stable transitions. i regret i was unable to resolve concerns of the individual member of the senate, former member of the senate. i would be honored and grateful to address concerns from many men are regarding my past service or current service when turkey or anywhere else. i thank you for the opportunity to get some of those concerns. >> thank you. >> as i understand, part of the questioning her questions were raised has to do with your tenure in iraq in as ambassador to egypt. whether any particular can errands they would like to

address today? >> i was very proud of my service not only in iraq but before saddam hussein and i worked with the iraqi opposition, democratic opposition to saddam hussein under president albright to my job was to help organize and support and invigorate the iraqis working for a post-saddam future was really a privilege to be part of that. i did that to the best of my ability and openly worked with members of the congress who are keenly interested. the particular questions, i'm sure ms to antagonize the members of the iraqi opposition. i worked very closely in egypt is not only the government, but very much civil society. the theory of the case we had was we had to press on all fronts, starting with a very

stubborn president mubarak who is committed and said in his ways with the people around him, with the government, which he states it very much a civil society. i was privileged to go to the headquarters of opposition movements to continue the flow of funding provided by the united states through usaid to civil society groups. i understand that remains an issue that i was proud to continue to do that and took up the issue with president mubarak himself and told him we were determined to keep doing them. again, i'm glad to answer to any particular questions that may come up. i made it a point to it without the religious community leaders, one of the great experiences of my life to have a crusader in cairo while the imprecations in affair where reading.

i met with his holiness potion it in many, many times and sought his advice on how best to advance the cause of freedom for egypt's christians. i met with the greek patriarch, the russian patriarch and took up the cause with mubarak himself, had a small success on that thread. i worked hard and when some embossed others, but that the nature of our business. on the guide to address any questions. >> thank you for addressing the concerns that have been raised. i was very surprised as i'm sure a lot of people were to see so many of the general staff downs over the weekend. i just wondered if you could give us your assessment of what that means for the civilian government, what it means in terms of the military.

how do we interpret what happened? >> thank you, madam chair. as to what this means for turkey, its democracy and civilian government, the turks themselves are analyzing all of that in debating it and deciding what it means that we are asking them for what it means for the united states and our security relationship with them. i am very confident that it does not cause a setback in any way. on the contrary, there's always that turnover in the usership and the store and over have been in a different way and for particular reasons articulated by general croatian air. security relationship goes beyond individuals. turkey is a state of law and

strong institutions are durable, even though their dynamic change. the strong military leaders will meet with new turkish military leaders. i look forward to getting back to meeting with the new military leadership. i'm very confident things will be just fine. >> thank you. senator lugar. >> thank you very much, madam chairman. ambassador eisen, the republic was expected to host a missile defense under the bush administration plans, but that plan was scrapped in 2009 in favor of the attack did reproach. even though we recently announced it was not an administration's current proposal, it appears open to considering future participation in projects.

what d.c. is the lay of the land they are as the discussion in any way disrupted our relationship and how do you propose we perceive? >> thank you, senator lugar. this has been a net good subject of conversation and i am pleased that the government is strongly supportive of the nato missile defense plan that they said that it approaches adopted at lisbon. you are of course quite right that an earlier conversation that we had with the check governments about the shared early warning system, which was prior to the adoption of the nato missile defense strategy at lisbon was overtaken by events. they felt that the limited data

is no longer necessary part of their results of the good conversations, good partnership between the czech government and the united states, including the u.s. embassy in prague has been strong embrace of the adaptive approaches adopted at lisbon. so it's full steam ahead. we are in as good a place as ever on that. >> so you've noted that a key priority to united states policy, the czech republic is to enhance regional energy security, including diversification. interview, what are the most pressing areas for cooperation in the sphere? >> there is a critical energy security issue in the czech republic.

100% of the czech republic's nuclear fuel is supplied by russia. 70% of the auto, 65% and we made diversification of our engagement the greatest single opportunity is thorough the expansion in they have six outstanding high functioning nuclear reactors, strong regulator unlike other nations, a very strong national commitment, not just every commitment, that's strong public report for this critical alternative energy source in the 21st century. and we've really focused there not just on the westinghouse bid to expand tunnel in, which is such a high dollar value, almost $20 billion potentially.

so many u.s. jobs. but that's just one part of this partnership and we have worked hard in embassy product and indeed throughout the united states government, one of the first things we did with comeback to tackle the interlocutors at work on a holy spirit approach to build a 21st century partnership between our two countries that goes beyond this date. so we're working on r&d, what can an education, regulation together both countries and that has been an important part of our work. i traveled recently with the foreign minister of the czech republic to texas to sign an agreement under a joint declaration on civil nuclear cooperation, which we have with czechs between texas a&m university, leading provider of decreasing subcellular nuclear engineering and the civil nuclear engineering network in the czech republic, so our two

nations can build in this area in the 21st century. >> is their public support in the czech republic at his ordinary citizens understand the diversification problem? >> there is, senator lugar. one of the most gratifying moments for me in return he to my mother's homeland was the rational and calm approach that the czech public took posed fukushima to their energy needs companies for energy security to diversify energy sources, their strong national consent is a big savior of strong government consensus in some of the risk factors that one sees elsewhere, whether it's tsunamis, earthquakes are not present there. so it's a very, very good location for the expansion. we're pleased to work again not just on that bid, but on a broad

partnership for civil nuclear security that is a model of how our two nations can work together. >> ambassador ricciardone, i have two parts of this. first of all, turkey remains central for the united states and european efforts to promote immigrant called pipeline project and provide for greater european energy independence. i think your views on what progress has been achieved recently and where the project may stand as opposed to rival pipeline projects. secondly, turkey has been in negotiation with the united states and nato missile defense radar for several years, with no agreement to finalize the several outstanding turkey concerns related to intelligence sharing with israel. how close are we to concluding a deal? can you make a comment under buco as well as the intelligence sharing situation? >> senator, on the southern energy transit corridor, which

the nobuko is one very good option, i can say we are intensively engaged. diplomats always say that. were always optimistic and there's progress. i believe there actually is -- this is compensated. or several governments involved, several companies involved. we're in touch with all of them at top levels. i can tell you without betraying any confidence that secretary clinton raised this issue of the prime minister on the foreign minister of turkey just two weeks ago. ambassador morningstar was along a letter with resume he'll. we've been pushing the prime minister he went on to azerbaijan. i have not had a readout of his discussions there, but i know he was intending to talk about this issue. the key of course is getting gas from the caspian to fill whatever pipeline is going to come down there. that's the next step for open within the next month an

agreement by the concerns -- the companies concerned to fill the pipeline and come to terms and transit fees. we are seized with that, we're working on it, we're hoping. i missile defense, turkey did support of course been made a statement at lisbon and the nato effort to have a face adaptive pro-choice system. we've moved well beyond the generality to it detailed technical discussions and legal discussions with the government of turkey. were hoping naturally so they want to understand what this will mean for turkey in all of it's technical, political, legal and certainly security aspects will make turkey more secure as well as the rest of nato and we believe were addressing those questions in full and subsidy detail. we hope that the turkish government will feel it has enough information to make a decision very soon.

i'll be racing back to try and find out more where we are thin. >> senator menendez. >> thank you, man in chair lady. congratulations to the both of you and your nominations. ambassador ricciardone, enjoyed the last conversation we had and i just want to pursue some items that have developed since we spoke in oneness with reference to cyprus as we know the parties are engaged in pretty intense talks facilitated by the united nations secretary and they look at the developments and i look at what has happened in the military and turkey, which is my view that part of the challenge of getting to a solution in cyprus and i look at this new development and wonder how that affects the possibility of making some real progress. on the flipside, i look at prime

minister guns recent statements that we should forget about what we are negotiating in the past, so this is now a two state solution which is different than the balsamo, by communal federation and eugene turkey sabre yachts to multiply in greater numbers are to have more settlers from anatolia. it doesn't seem to be in line with moving towards a solution. so, can you give me an update in your days since turkey is a key player as to whether or not we're going to be able to achieve a resolution to the division of cyprus? are those facts complicating opportunities? have you see it? >> senator, wish i could do the diplomatic thing in same optimistic and there is progress, but i don't want to mislead. on the first part of your question, i don't believe the changes in the military

leadership didn't turkey will make any difference one way or the other interns that the prospects in cyprus. i don't think it's entirely germane. the military is not calling shots on this. on this policy the government of turkey. posted at prime minister's statement said rather not parse and say anything here that makes it any harder than rdas for the united nations and secretary general's representative downer. he has succeeded in getting the turkish community leader to commit to a meeting with some frequency you believe twice a week from now into the fall to press, press, press for the only shape of a solution that anyone is ever consider possible, which

is by zonal, by communal federation. we continue to uphold that the supportive. kenefick. state and secretary gordon reads this and they were in istanbul at the turkish leadership a couple weeks ago. the net are you really do not believe that burlew could make his own decisions notwithstanding what the turkish government user? do think he could make independent decisions notwithstanding the turkish government? >> the turkish government is extremely salient. i would point out even since i've been back to turkey this time there've been some tensions in the relationship between the community in northern cyprus and acre. there've been protests even back and forth. the survey identified themselves as cypriots from my understanding, turkish cypriots to be sure. but that is a distinct identity. beyond that i wouldn't wish a

comment to have guesses as to how far he would go in making decisions that would be at variance. >> of us and so much about aerialists as much as the assignment for you and turkey and its influences the decision-making process. for my decision, certainly for nine at the following for almost 20 years now, it is clear to me that turkey has a very significant in plants and whether or not this issue is resolved in a way acceptable both to the international community. and i just get a sense based upon the prime minister's most recent statements, i just think it has become more onerous, not less onerous to try to achieve that goal. >> when they turned to another issue, which i'm sure you want to be diplomatic about. and that is the question of come

as our ambassador to turkey in this relationship with armenia. from your view, has the united states ever denied the fact that there was an armenian genocide? >> i stand behind president obama's characterization of the ethnic aaron, the armenians themselves call it, the tragic massacre, murder of a million and a half men, women and children marching to their deaths in 1915. do they stand behind our characterization of that in our efforts above are trying to do. >> would you disagree with president obama statements that senator obama? >> i would not disagree with our president, scared or station.

>> what you disagree with vice president biden's characterization of senator biden? >> they are both numbness appears and i certainly would not disagree with their comments. >> would you disagree with the secretary of state's characterization of the armenian genocide of senator clinton? >> i certainly would not disagree with my secretary of state. >> you are wise beyond your years. [laughter] each of these individuals, the president of the united states, vice president, secretary of state and senator at the time from the respective states acknowledge the fact of the armenian genocide during their tenure as senator and it just seems to me, not in chair that once again i appreciate ambassador your wrist on sales, but here we are again, you know, playing an incredibly difficult set of circumstances where we have nominees to armenia, going to armenian genocide

commemorations and never being able to use the word genocide. we have our ambassador to turkey, which is an important party to get beyond this and move forward for the future. but if we can recognize the historical facts and get onto the future in the same set of circus dances then you have our president, chris president can affect her to stay, all very clearly that members of this body have recognized there was an armenian genocide. it's very difficult to understand how we move forward in that respect. very difficult to repair diplomats in that respect, but i appreciate your answers may have other questions but i see he's coming back. >> of the back for the second panel. >> thank you, and chair. senator casey. >> thank you, senator shaheen. i want to thank both of the nominees for your public service in your testimony here today. i know that time is short we are

limited in the topics we can cover, but i want to start with ambassador ricciardone and the sense that we are going to be talking later at some length about serious and the massacre going on there. it has been my sense i think it's a widely shared view that over a number of years if not for more than a generation, but certainly within the last member of yours, turkey has been able to play a significant role as a regional balancer of the power of the region has also been very constructive at times in the region. this is one of those times when the world needs the help that turkey can provide as it relates to syria. these acts of violence against the people of syria iran except

it will. it is a regime that no longer has legitimacy at all because of those acts of violence. i guess i'd ask you, i know that prime minister or to one has been pretty clear and pretty strong in his statements as it relates to what's been hunting in inferior, but i would ask you to reflect upon to give us your sense of what it -- what turkey's perspective is on this violence, what turkey can do in the near term to put pressure on the asad regime and how turkey can be a construct to force within the region on the central question. >> senator, thank you for that question. in fact, we have been engaged with the prime minister directly i personally had taken a message to him from president obama.

the president has spoken with them personally. the president did a couple weeks ago. he, president do, foreign minister have all seen very high in their scope because if they point out, as important as egypt and tunisia, turkey shares 850-kilometer border. there's an important trading relationship. any instability could have direct security and economic repercussions on turkey's vital national interest. the prime minister back in sharon had spoken about what he called the barbarity of the fourth spoken about what he called the barbarity of the fourth. just yesterday spoke called the barbarity of the fourth. just yesterday spoke for all turks responding to what was going on in hana by saying i.t. was horrified and shocked and he

even noted that necessary sanctions may be on the table. it is one thing when western countries express our outrage and talk about these things. but when a neighbor as powerful as turkey says these things, i have to hope. i think the prime minister has made very clear in public a conversation with the senate delegation just about a month ago were a number of times we are pressed to find out what to press was thinking about the prime minister. he made clear he was upset, worried, concerned, that he believed turkey had to exhaust every other avenue to invest change and reform in syria and get them to stop the violence

against their own people to listen to their people. he admitted that they had been trying hard and had not very successful. the united states find ourselves in the same position. we've tried everything to encourage press, pressure for reform. a colleague will speak to those efforts in a few minutes. and we heard president gilly yesterday expressing turkey sense that perhaps they reach something like the end of that patients. we'll have to see. >> i know there's more we could talk about with regard to syria. i wanted to move to the question never ran. we know that the iranian regime has been the object of a broader raise sanctions and that is, in the last year or so been a very positive step in the right direction. there's a lot of unanimity in the region and well beyond the region about sanctions against the iranian regime. i asked with regard to that

question how you assess or how you think the turks can help us to enforce the sanctions to make sure they are enforced by their government and to make sure that they can be a force in urging turkish governments and other businesses in the region to comply with -- not just comply with, but to be cognizant of the iranian sanctions. >> thank you, senator. the turkish leadership at all levels, whenever we speak about iran are in fact how we oppose any iranian effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction. they are the first pick since, but a race of such weapons in the region, which they do not want to see a man unleashed. they assert that they are firmly

enforcing the united nations security council stations, including under 1929 for which they didn't vote. he on that, we have asked for specific help. they say that the united states was, specific u.s. sanctions, does not apply to turkey, the turkey firms can be affected and turkish firms will have to make a choice under our law as to do with america and american companies or iranian ones. we have asked them to go beyond that and i'll publicize what that means in technical detail if banks or other companies want to do business with iran, help them understand. we are putting out disinformation. we at the u.s. embassy are glad to spread the information that we as regulators and government entities to point out and remind their companies of the choices

they're going to have to face and make the information further available in turkish to their companies. we are working with them. >> the major thing conclusion with regard to cyprus, i associate myself with senator menendez's comments about that subject and i know ambassador eisen come i don't have time to ask your question,, but will submit in writing. i hope you know the high regard we have for you as well that we have a lot of friends in pennsylvania. thank you. >> thank you, senator casey. >> senator coons. >> thank you, madam chairwoman. i want to thank ambassador's eisen, ricciardone and ford. you all served with conviction and you can continue in the strong stone leadership roles. assay for the second panel, so i do commend ambassador ford for

demonstrating real leadership resolve in the face of difficult circumstance and syria by the personally going to a meeting with demonstrators and protesters in difficult circumstances and in advocating for values and interests of the nation. i hope it is clear that many in the body share secretary clinton statement that president assad has lost legitimacy about to pass forward in syria. as a release to turkey, and turned by recent events about with this weekend's resignation but military leadership really means, about tension between the secular military traditions and foundations in the modern turkish state increasingly islamist tendencies that some in the current administration, and very concerned about turkish relationships with israel. to ambassador ricciardone, you've chosen a particularly interesting poster to turn to ask questions from other members

of the panel has suggested, whether it's the relations of cyprus, greece, ongoing challenges in iran, syria come relationship with israel, plenty we can dedicate her time too. i mean no disrespect to ambassador eisen who serves one of our closest and best allies, but there is a rich menu questions to you. your last comment there about the choice that turkish comments make about the same sanctions under a saudi something i strongly report senator casey raising the issue. i think it is very critical that we engage turkish business and i am thankful for the u.s. turkey is nice and leadership in opening u.s. markets, but it would also urge your aggressive engagement to the extent appropriate and clarifying our very strong concerns of the nation about iran in its development is pleased to hear response to previous questions, your view has been engaged in effective in advocating for you

think what is a very broadly shared both the national concern over the tragic events of syria and i would view it as against humanity by the assad regime and murdering their own people. i want to associate myself with senator menendez's questions about cyprus and in asking two questions if i could. the first to be, what have you been able to do to promote religious freedom? you reference with bartholomew and the path forward there might be restoring property and that how key theological seminary and what we can do to be in advocating religious tolerance and openness in turkish society? second, what is your assessment of the state of turkish israeli? turkey for a long time as a vital ally of israel and it's my hope the recent changes in military leadership will open a window for improved relations. i recognize this is a very

difficult moment in getting past the difficulties of last year's flotilla incident are quite difficult. so getting the imitations of your role as a diplomatic representative of the united states come i welcome any insight you have in our strength and business ties and recognize they wonderful ally in the conflict in iraq and i stood against us in any contacts while pressing toward religious freedom and importance of our strategic relationship with israel. >> senator, thank you for others questions. but mr. with religious freedom first amendment went to israel. if we wish to pursue cyprus and i thought we could do that as well. i have raised this question with all of the leaders i've been privileged to see and i made it a point to: community leaders as well. one of the community leaders per spec to it, not only on the property issues, not only with

the greek orthodox secours, but said the armenian community, it sirianni is have their own issues and i've gone into some detail and learn the legal questions. they'll have legal cases at one level or another in the turkish court, which they are prepared to take on to international court. i don't want to betray any of their confidences in the sleep of things, but they are encouraged by the first-ever contacts they are having with high leaders of the state, most sensitive ones regarding their issues and things that really matter in that part of the world in particular and that his honor and dignity and respect. they have had the first-ever visits by high officials of the state to then. not that into their offices at the prime minister and governor, but governors and prime minister coming to them. that is not happen before in

anyone's memory at least in the modern history of the republic. whenever he sees it high officials of the state, they say why should you be surprised? we are not afraid of religion. and they're interestingly, to follow our debates about personal freedom and religious freedom and they say, here is how you can understand this common american ambassador appeared in your country, you have in recent years made a distinction between freedom of religion and the concept of freedom from religion. and for too long and our modern republic, we focused on preventing the intrusion of religion and our national life and political life. we are quite comfortable to be observant muslims. please don't call us islamists by the way, they tell us. but to the extent that someone is praying as a christian or a jew it doesn't bother us at all. why should it? we are rather proud of our

diversity and we are happy to have them do it. as a property issues, let us take a fresh look at this and make sure that they get justice. i am very hopeful and again i don't want to betray any confidences i do want to overpromise, but a derby hopeful that hokey seminary will be resolved in his all holiness the anniversary of the nation in the 40 years as a priest and i know he very much like to see that resolve this year and we would do. on israel i can't speak. i have israeli friends, i don't claim expertise. but i feel very certain having discussed this at length with the prime minister and foreign minister, certainly the military leadership, that all these turks , whatever their feelings, misgivings, irritation issues over the terrible flotilla incident of last year, over events in gaza, they understand

that to influence events in the region, to be part of a more peaceful and prosperous region, which is in their vital national interest, and they need to have a normal, fruitful, respectful, full diplomatic dialogue with israel and they want to get back to that. ..

>> i have to preside over the senate in a few minutes, but i wanted to raise one more question for ambassador eisen before i go. the reset policy with russia suggested engagement with russia would come at the expense of allies in central and eastern europe. i wonder if you could speak to the czech republic's view of the administration's reset efforts with russia. >> i think that the czech republic has come to understand and appreciate the spirit of the reset with russia and the benefits that that confers, not just for u.s.-russian relationship, but in the region. of course, the president has

made prague a centerpiece of these issues going to prague twice including having the privilege to accompany him last year for the signing of the s.t.a.r.t. treaty with the president, and i was very pleased, i think, in a token of the, and indeed more than a token, a recognition of the importance of these issues that my czech colleagues affirmatively embrace the so-called prague agenda and took the bull by the horns and scheduled a conference, an international conference on the prague agenda, not long after i arrived in the czech republic to comeme rate the one year and two year anniversary of the president's speeches there. we had representatives from russia, from the united states,

and from around the world come including dr. gary seymour from the white house, one of the principle advisers to the president on these matters to think about the long-term benefits can be for the region and for the world, and so i think we have made good process. i could give more examples, but we have made good progress on the grounds and important to have an ambassador there to help con vary communications on both directions on the subject and happy where we are with the reset now. >> thank you very much. senator casey or senator coons, either of you have questions for the panel? i have a few questions to present in writing to each of you, and the record will stay open until close of business on friday for further questions from members of the committee, so hearing no further questions, i thank you both for your service and willingness to continue to do this and hope to

get swift action from the senate and close the hearing and turn the gavel over to senator casey.

>> the house of representatives have been off eight weeks this year. did you get age weeks of vacation, i didn't. >> the rt network tries to take a a view on washington and the u.s.. >> we're willing to step outside the box, try something different to figure out how to make tv

news exciting and entertaining and informative again rather than i'm sorry, but like i said the gar -- garbage it's dwindled down to be. >> she'll talk about her show sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> rick santorum talks about the support for the amendment and taked about medicaid and why he feels he can beat president obama in the general election. he met with the "des moines register" ed foryal board for an hour. >> we'll get started visiting with senator rick santorum who is running for president. you're meeting with writers and editors, editorial writers for

the "des moines register" and after we kick things off it's a free-for-all inform mall conversation. how much time do you have? >> i think we have an hour, yeah, so we're good. >> we'll keep it at that. let me fire off the first question, and then everybody else can dive in when they want. tell me, why given condition of the country right now, why in the world would you want to be president? >> well, i mean, you know, i announced president back in june back in summerset county pennsylvania because it was a site of a place that was, to me, very symbolic. it's five miles from where flight 9/11 went down in pennsylvania. to me, that's a symbol where the fight against external threats, fight those who want to rob us of our freedom from external force that battle was first

engaged in most recently, and secondly was 20 miles from where my grandfather came to this country and brought my dad, and that was our own little perm fight for people for my family. my father came from italy and rejected fascism, government control of his life and children's life and their future, and so he came to summerset to dig coal, a coal town called carpenter's park. it was a company town. lived in a house owned by the company there and was paid with company stamps. that was a dead end, so he took less money for cash. he end up working in the mines until he was 72 and provided a better life for my dad who came here at 7 years of age, and, you

know, here, it's a personal symbol how america created opportunity for me and for now my children and caroline's children so i thought like one of the responsibilities you have if you're in a position to serve the country at a time when you think your country is in need of that service, you step up, and i know it maybe from the outside looking in at this, what is a guy, you know, in my situation both politically and personally doing this? you have seven children, ages up to 23. they could otherwise gain your attention, and you lost your last political race. why do you think you can make a difference? well, just felt like i could. as i travel around the country, doing a lot of media and such, got a lot of encouragement from

folks and got a sense the message i was communicating would be different from everybody else and that i could serve the role of being part of the process that could bring us a new heard -- leader in this country, something absolutely necessary for the future of our country and our freedom. >> how is your message different than the others? >> well, the message is different -- it's a combination of things. the message is different in the sense that i look at things more holistically than folks in the race. i don't look them as individual silos, but integrated. i talk about it that way. i talk about how our country is founded on moral principles on the foundational element of the society which is the family, and that we can't have a strong economy and those who listen to my speeches, i talk about health care and the economy and things to do, but i talk about it from the standpoint that the first economy is the family.

the word economy comes from the greek word home. i understand the first hospital, first school, first economy, first church, all is the family. if we don't have the solid and stable family, we won't have a stable economy. that's objective. just look at the statistics. when families are broken, they don't do as well economically, children don't do as well. the stronger the marriage bond in the family, the stronger the economy will be and the country will be not just from the standpoint of the economy, but our country as a moral enterprise. i talk about that in detail in my speeches and how we have to be a country of strong moral character, and if we are not, if we're a country that defines -- i talk about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. if we define happiness as the pursuit of pleasure, we will not be a country much longer. country in the pursuit of happiness is the pursuit of what you ought to do, not what you want to do, what you're called to do and supposed to do.

we are going to be constrained by change from within our change from without. you can't have limited government. people don't behave in a way that is consistent what is good for everyone and yourselves in the long term, not the short term pleasures, and the less miranda rule and the less kind of character that we have, and doing what we ought to do, the more government we're going to have. simple as that. if you want any doubt of that, look at the communities where people don't behave the way they ought to. you see a lot of government, not many freedom, a poor economy, and all other things that i don't think people want to see as the future of our country. >> so what -- >> just want to finish one thing. that's on the policy side, and the other thing is i look at the folks in the race and other folks getting in the race, and i feel i bring something to the table both from the standpoint of the electoral success in areas of the country and in places where if we're going to win the election, we have to be successful. get elected in pennsylvania four

times in districts heavily democrat when i was in the house, and obviously the state of pennsylvania is a very tough state to win, and i was able to do so. i did something no one else in the race -- i guess people may be get into the race, i don't know who is getting in, but at this point, people on the debate floor thursday night. no one else beat a democratic un-- endumb bent and i won, but i got rid of him since he retire the instead of running against him because i think he knew he couldn't beat me. third, i beat a democrat from the united states senate and ran against the team running the campaign. i've been up against the best in the toughest environment you can. we won the state of pennsylvania, and i'm in a dead heat with president obama, and i have not got a lot of national

attention, and i'm the only person in this race by measuring the gallop poll from march to july everyone else in the race or a perspective race has had their name identification increased except me. why is the national media not talking about me but others who are way below me in the national poll? they get lots of attention. no one pays tapings to me. that doesn't bother me. i just keep working. in some respects, i benefit from that because they would not say a lot of nice things about me, but nevertheless, you know, we go out, work hard, and we have, i think we have a track record that shows we have the potential for electoral success, a track record which i think conservatives who are obviously making up the vast majority of the folks in the republican primaries, not just here in iowa, but across the country. they see someone over the course of my political career has been

a fighter for conservative principles on national security, cultural issues, economic, fiscal, and i think that is something different. i was -- hank brown, former senator from colorado, was in denver last week sate rick was a conservative before it was cool to be a conservative. you can trust pennsylvania is a little bit different from other peoples in the race. >> if one shares your view of the family unit, and it should be preserved and in tact and moral, what role does the president of the united states play in that? >> he's the leader of the country. >> could you be more specific about the relationship between the family unit and the president, what you would do -- >> the president is concerned about the health of the country and the health of the family is important to the health of the country. >> how would you strengthen the family unit as president? >> i would support the federal

marriage amendment which i did in the united states senate. i would be active as i was here in iowa in making sure that states didn't create a situation that was unatapeble in the long term having 50 different marriage laws in the country. marriage is a foundational element of society. you can't have 50 laws with respect to it. it's unsustainable, and so i'm someone who would go out and speak and talk about it. one of the issues that we found in states twha have voted the issue of marriage and there's been 31 referendums on the issue of marriage from maine to california, and 31 times marriage is sustained. in most states, that was not the case when the debate began. the reason is people naturally, and this is the good quality of americans, they want to be tolerant. they say, look, if people want to do it, it's their business. why does it affect me? they realize it does affect them, the family.

it affects the faith. it affects, you know, your children and what they are taught and who teaches them and it has a profound impact on you. everybody. everybody's marriage, not just the people who want to get married, and if you look at the impact on the family itself and what will happen to the institution of marriage, marriage is what marriage is. marriage existed before there was a government. it's like, you know, saying this glass of water is a glass of beer. you can call it beer, but it's not. it's a glass of water. water is what water is. marriage is what marriage is. now, you can try to say, well, we're going to make this something else, but it doesn't change the character of what it is. marriage is an essential element of the civilization. it bonds -- it is a former recognition of the bonds between a man and woman for the purposes of helping both men and women fulfill their complement role in

nature as well as create opportunity for the best situation for children to be raised in a stable family. that's an intrinsic good to society. my relationship with my aunt is intrinsic good to the society. it's a good thing, but we don't celebrate it saying we're giving special privileges to the government because i love my aunt. why? it's not as valuable to the society as my relationship is with my wife for the purposes of raising children and what it does for us in our lives. it's different. not that two people who love each other, whatever love it is, isn't important and fine, but does not have the value to society and should not be recognized and lifted up as such. when you do so, you delabel the other. you cannot recognize one that has less value, intrinsically less value than something else and call it the same and not devalue the other. that's what happens. in fact, when you see that happen, what happens with marriage is -- you've seen it in

europe in places for a long period of time. two people get married, have children out of wedlock before they get married, and marriage is a casual relationship. why? because they are not built on the procreative elements of what marriage is about and the stability of having children, they are not as stable over time. in fact, they don't claim to be stable over time, so what we're doing is changing the nature and character of marriage which is a destructive thing for society. beyond that, leave the family thing aside and what it does for religion. we don't give if homo sexual marriage or other marriage is e -- equivalent to traditional marriage, we would say to folks to, you know, are marriage counselors that if you don't council for same-sex marriage, you're a bigot, and we will not

give you a license. there's other things with abortion that are illegal and others find them immoral. if you don't do what the state tells you to do, you lose your license, your ability to practice medicine. because we don't -- and this is going to be even worse because this is considered a bigoted activity now. we don't give, for example, in boston, the catholic church didn't want to do -- it is trumped because we created a superright. there's a right in the constitution of religious right, but there's a superright that's above the rights in the constitution, and that's of sexual liberty. that's wrong, a droughtive element -- destructive element of this debate, and it's not talked about. guess what? when we have these debates, these things are talked about. people do want to be very

tolerant as i do. people should live the life they want, i have no problem about that. that's not what the debate is about. it's about recognizing the right and changing the laws that impact everybody else, and that is a public policy issue, not an issue of against anybody. it's an issue about the public policy and the impact of that public policy on faith, on family, and, yes, education because now, of course, we have this sexual behavior of being normal, natural, something that is a good, something that society affirms, and so, of course, it must be taught that way, and we're seeing it now in states being taught to very, very young children which i don't believe parents find necessarily a good, and nor do i find it to be helpful for children at a time when sexual confusion can be accelerated by the state, so we're talking about profound consequences here. i know it's always well, how does my marriage affect you? it affects it profoundly. we have that debate and

discussion, then the american people say, you know what? you are allowed to live the life you want to live, but don't try to reorder society in a way that can undermind the basic structure values of faith and of education, and of family. >> you've said, and it was in today's register in fact, something about preschools or education in general usurping the role of family. can you expand what you mean by that? >> sure. i take about this all the time. who is responsible for educating your children. you are. parents are. the government is there to help you do what is your responsibility. we have been -- some, you know, have been convinced that it's government's role to educate your children and many in government believe it's government's recall to educate your children, and i think that's just a foundationally flawed approach.

parents should have the responsibility, and therefore should have the right to structure the educational environment and have the cooperation of the state, not the resistance of the state to do so in a way consistent with what they believe is in the best interest of their children. why? because they know their children and their needs better than the state does. that's not how the system operates now. now it's you hand the kids off, we tell you what's best, this is what you get, and if it causes problem -- the best school districts don't do that, but, of course, a lot of districts do do that, and certainly when the government from the top dictating what all the education policies should be and how we're going to order and structure the classroom, you have less and less parental control and less and less individual catering to the needs of that child and there's a poorer education system. go into mcdonalds and there's just one thing, a big mac.

it's not what everybody wants or needs. unless we change the dinism of the education system, focus it on the consumer, the consumer is the parent -- >> what's the federal role in education? >> it will be incredibly limited. you know, i don't come in with the mistake that george bush came in with that i'm the governor of the united states. it's not federal jobs and responsibility to reorder the education system. i think it's our job to make clear what the education system should look like which i've just done, and then -- >> so is there a role for no child left behind, race to the top, ect.? would you -- >> i would do with education what i think we need to do with a lot of programs that have migrated to the federal level which is to return them to the states, return them from the states more into the local area, and have, you know, the education system as we found it from no child left behind which

i voted for because i believed we needed to have some sort of natural testing to see how we were doing. it was clear we were not doing well, but there was a lot of, well, disagreement among the education world and as to how well we were performing and i thought some testing to give us an idea of how we were doing was a good idea >> [inaudible] >> i was not for the other things, all the levers to move states and local school districts to do what we wanted them to do. in retrospect, the testing was fine, but the other parts were a negative. i said that at the time. i didn't like it at the time. >> would you get rid of it it? >> yeah, i don't think we need the federal intervention and education. it's not working. the education system continues to decline, and i believe that we need to have an education system that is much more dynamic in engaging parents and

students, and we're using a -- >> but it's up to the states to do that? that's not on your agenda? >> my agenda is to say what i'm saying, get that power back to the states, and encourage parents, fire up parents if necessary, one of the roles as leader of the country is talk about issues that are issues that the federal government doesn't need necessarily do something about, but involve themselves in shaping the discussion and discourse in the country without man mandating it. that's the proper role. >> is health care one of those issues, and how would you approach that one, the federal role? >> i continue the federal role with medicare. i believe that medicaid should be sent back to the states. we should do with medicaid what we did with welfare. in fact, in 1996 during the welfare reform acts bill grahm

and i introduced a bill to do exactly to do to medicaid what was being done to welfare, a form of per capita block grant to the states and give them the flexibility to design their health care system and pushing it down to have the kind of, again, solutions closest to the people affected by the decisions, so whether it's health care, education, housing, food stamps, these programs do not need to be at the federal level. this is not the 1950s anymore where states are all over the map with respect to their able -- >> do all of those become block grants then? >> they would not be all the same type of structure, but, yes, all limited capped federal participation and we would orient the programs back to the state level and give them the flexibility to design the program they need. >> with medicare and the federal government and health care --

[inaudible] >> one of the things i said for a long period of time is, you know, we need to encourage a market in health care. you have a situation where, you know, i believe costs are going to be controlled one of two ways, either top-down or bottom-up. can we create a system, as i think we can, to create a better opportunity for people to manage their own health care? one of the things i was an advocate for while in the congress back in 1992 i think it was, john casaic and i introduced the first health savings account bill. why? because it puts the consumer in charge of their health care purchase. we have a false economy in health care. >> what was -- what kind of insurance do you have? >> we have an insurance policy that was -- i got my insurance policy through the ethics and

policy center and there was one policy to choose from. i didn't have a lot of choice from the place i got it. we are on cobear from there and later we have to make a decision and go from there. .. if you haven't employer-provided been needed a complete tax-free

benefit. if you don't have employer-provided plan, you have to pay, like i do come with after-tax dollars to buy insurance. over the federal government discriminate against people it should be doing more to help as opposed to lenders that have employed providers. that's the way it is. it's never made sense. i think back in the 90s it was a $3000 or $2000, but that was a whole different time and a whole different cost of health care. we headed in the numbers simply because we were concerned about budgetary constraints in the leg. a wonderful opportunity with repealing obama carries a lot of flexibility and resources to deal with this. people understand they want to make commitments to make sure that we have some form availability of coverage for people and i think having a tax -- refundable tax credit idea to hope individuals and

families purchase health insurance is a better approach to do that than the top down basically driving most people ultimately off their employers health care and to -- >> is very tense for that refundable credits and how much would you have to? >> again, i haven't put forth a plan on that yet, but i certainly will take a look at it and as far as a means by this concern, generally speaking higher income people are generally insured and so i think it would probably come at least originally was a flat amount of money, that is equipped and can scale, the amount of people who participate will be pretty small. [inaudible] the nondiscrimination against preexisting conditions, meaning

children on health care policy, which you try to keep any of those asked ex? >> for two reasons. number one, anybody that has insurance rates out through their employers, who changes the employer or ghost or another insurance policy is already covered under the preexisting class. i would never made clear by the opponent ministration. everyone was thrown off the policy. that's simply not the case. the only hole i saw in the cause was that you had individually purchased insurance what's new for an individual policy to another policy you could get nailed. but the biggest issue with these causes have good people who do not have insurance and then want to get insurance. of course the reason for the preexisting clause is we don't want to create a situation where people don't get insurance until they get sick or have been asked and peered in the reason barack

obama, as you know, did not enforce the preexisting condition clauses until the mandate was put in because if you enforce it before, what you do is encourage everybody to drop insurance. because you don't have to have insurance until years that. of course why pay a premium? particularly if you're young and single ui to worry about children and complications of that. but the preexisting condition caused the two would create to a much higher rate of insurance and premiums for people who have insurance. so it sounds great, but unfortunately there is the law of unintended consequences and the law of unintended consequences with respect to preexisting condition creates a moral hazard that his stature metal to everybody. so you say that is good. it's not really good. it actually can be bad. very situations of course for people who are in difficult situations because of

preexisting condition causes and in most cases, what usually fine. and by the way, preexisting conditions only last for a year. they don't cover the preexisting conditions for a year and after a year they do cover. mostly a lot of states have open enrollment. a lot of insurance companies have open enrollments. so i'm in the market, either situations and instant lives per this is a problem? yes, but they're fairly limited in what i would suggest is using not as an excuse for the entire government takeover, the health care system is sort of the tip of the tail again. >> how do you think the country got millions and millions of uninsurance? p. mackey got to go through a look at who makes the uninsured. you know, have the uninsured are uninsured for six months or less

beard and on what the statistics are in the last year and that may be different because it recession from the prolonged fashion. the uninsured population generally turns over very quickly. secondly of course you've got a sizable part of the uninsured were illegal immigrant and upwards, depending on what immigration group you immigration you people even come anywhere from eight to 12 million. so you've got 40, 45 million. 46 million, 47 -- the number thrown around for a long time. who are uninsured. see you have roughly a quarter to a third of those votes who are not going to be covered under any system must we say we're going to go after and insurance benefit. their son, but not very many people who supported. so if you look at how the number of uninsured are not chronically insured him a look another pod

and a fairly small percentage of the population. of course what we find wayfinding medicating cc here in the state of iowa and all over des moines people getting signed people getting signed up to medicaid, a sizable number who are eligible for insurance and are participating because they don't do what's necessary to do so. when you look at the chronically uninsured, that aren't eligible for medicare and a very small number. so it can come you need to transfer the entire health care system to take care of the very small niche of the problem. >> is not a problem in the country? >> i don't think i said that. >> i said the very small number of people who are chronically uninsured. i didn't say there was wasn't a health care problem. for those people that about four. you do something to provide an opportunity for them to get the palace in the basic policy is certainly have encouraged people

to do is have a basic catastrophic insurance policy, which is of a medical savings policy account, which if you know is relatively inexpensive. and again, is that the best possible health care plan? no, but not everybody is the best house. not everybody has the best food come in the best. this is what we have to begin to look at. all the other necessities of life we allow for people to have varied degrees of creature comforts because we are people that rationing resources based upon what's important to us and health care has to be one of those things, which is in the mix of things that we make decisions about as to what type of money we want to allocate to that. i had one of the other day, if you remember what town in iowa who cannot begin play cannot figure vanishes to pay $200 a

month for prescription. i asked her what it was about and she said another versus $200 it keeps your life. she said yes. and you're complaining you're spending $200 a month and it keeps you alive? what is your cable bill? what is your cell phone bill? she had a cell phone. how can you say -- you complain your $200 a month to keep you alive and that's a problem with? no, that's a blessing. but it's the idea we have as been privy to this country is something you don't pay for it. trust me if health care is something you will pay for, someone else will dictate how we constrain the cost. i always lose the example of another necessity that's actually a greater necessity than half care and not suit. do you have sued insurance? should every american a food insurance? favor right guaranteed up to. >> they certainly were for a long time. the farm programs were for a very limited number of commodities, very limited,

mostly big states here. i came from pennsylvania and we didn't have a farm programs for most of the agriculture in our state. we didn't have it for the apples, peaches, we didn't have before strawberries. i mean, going down the list. we had a program for the maine state staple crops as well as we did eat like cotton, which has very little to do with keeping food prices low. they had to do with the politics of agriculture. so i'll accept that, but it's only a limited area, not a broad area of agriculture. so i would say that we didn't have a federal policy will encourage people to buy food insurance. but if we did, imagine how much food we pass. imagine if he went to the grocery store and paid a heavy favorite dollars a month to get all the food he wanted and have a little copenhagen.

you go in there, when the prices on anything. step in your cart and check out in the checker would say that's $532 of which you pay $40.12. well, how much are people and a shot? how much will they worry about what they buy what they buy and how expensive it is? that's the problem. and we see this all the time. if you have a pain in your back and it's bothering her for a while, you go to the top of your. now if he had to pay for the cat scan to take a look at it, you'd say, you know what, maybe i fell and hurt, maybe if it's the $400 have to pay for the cat scan you won't do that. but you do it now because you pay a copayment for 40 bucks. for $40 it's worth. $400 it's not worth it. everybody pays a $360. is that a good allocation of resources? now, is there one chance that

something very severe is happening kirksey burkett back of the cell. those are the kinds of things that happen every single day in the health care system, where people are not connecting treatments of dollars. in fact, they've checked the connection treatment of dollars. the only way government has figured out how to deal with that is to control from the top, limit access to care, which is exactly what's going on with obamacare. >> which is what drew a bruising battle with the federal debt ceiling and it looks like we're not out of that discussion. >> we kicked the can. >> the talk about your philosophy of government debt and spending and deficits. >> at a pretty long track record. change the united states and is a pretty strong advocate to the balanced budget. i strongly believe that is the long-term answer to maintaining fiscal responsibility and i

would urge you to maintain freedom. here you talk a lot about how freedom is essentially a stake in this election with obamacare be the nail in the coffin that take people's freedom away and has to be completely dependent on things essential for their life, they can changes in america and limited government forever can be gone. and we see that in every social life and the government becomes the, a big part of peoples lives and freedom is a zero-sum game. government has control or you have control and in this case the thing flips. so one of the other reasons i support the balanced budget amendment that limits the one the united states senate signed onto. limits the size of government to 18% of gdp, which is the historic average since world war ii. and so by limiting government as a percentage of gdp, you

guarantee freedom and the government won't take over, not via barack obama's budget, 40% of the economy. and the government is 40%, people will be less free. freshest if that. it gets too big and controls too much. so i think having a cap on the size of government and having a requirement we balanced our budget and create an exit ramp that there is an emergency, if three fifths of the house and senate decide to exceed the budget limit we can do so, which of course is really no constraint. you have to do everything in the senate anyway. >> which means they don't do anything. >> while it does because you have to get three fifths of the house. first off i'm getting freaked us of the senate is not an easy thing to do, particularly doing something seen as bypassing the cost you shall requirement. i think they find hard to do and that's the way it should be.

>> as we've seen, even urgent answer difficult to get three simple majority of congress, let alone two thirds. >> will we find that at certain times based on the leadership of our country. we find it very, very hard when you have the leadership and there's absolutely no leadership in the state. you have to look at my record. if you look at the record of what i've been able to accomplish you do see are hard, tough conservative. yeah, but i was the welfare entitlement. we were able to do income support. some people say even more of something the left to hold onto. income support. we wrote and federal entitlement and get bill clinton to have the democratic caucus to sign onto. >> what are some specific places you would cut in the federal

budget? the mac i talk about a whole host of problems that would send back to the state. look, when please are block grants. [inaudible] >> the outcome of what we do with welfare is the café. this means they grow exponentially so they are capped entitlements, which means the growth -- the problem is the growth of these problems. i think most people in washington, most people would agree if you take a program, which is growing at a percent, which is that medicaid is growing at any say it's not to grow, that's a cut. i mean, that's reducing the federal government suffocation going forward on an issue. and do the same thing with food stamps. >> would see the balanced budget amendment in place today. [inaudible] >> hold on, i don't advocate --

some people say you can balance the budget tomorrow. i think i would be responsible to cut 42% because that's how much was borrowed. you can't cut 42% tomorrow. if you look at the amendment, if as it's five years from ratification and of course ratification will take anywhere from two to four years. so you're talking about a glide path and i think that's a responsible glidepath to get you there. on the first things he do to reverse the public deficit is to get going. the president has done everything he can to stifle growth and innovation by oppressive government regulation. i saw john barrasso yesterday, a couple days ago on the floor talking about an analysis he did -- where if government regulations were promulgated last month were costing business $10 a month. i mean, it's suffocating what this administration is doing with all the regulatory

agencies. so one of the things you need to do is look and see how we can get change in the regulatory environment from what this president has done. but it's again command-and-control. we know that spirit will tell you how to run your business from health insurance to firming. the government says this is what you do and how you do it. sorry about that. and it's contracting business, paralyzing business, creating uncertainty. plus you have a president who routinely, just like franklin roosevelt beat the out of business, tell them how bad they are, how they don't care about anybody, how will go after them, tax them, regulate them. why would you want to do business the next country if you have someone who is antibusiness. guess what? the don't have to and they don't purity through on want talk about the fact he wants to

implement this huge new health care bureaucracy and the cost of that, taxes and plays, businesses are saying drop another one. energy. the president has done more to drive up the cost of energy than any other president in history wonders at the impact is of high gasoline prices on the economy. we have a pipeline that may be shut down because there's not oil going to work to work on the floor of the oil may start. not only will it be a situation where were not really more, boost production we have right now than there is zero about it. we have a problem and can wire, north dakota, no, not sure. deepwater, no. and he wonders why gasoline prices are high. we just found it years ago and we knew it was there, but the second-largest natural gas in the world hardware seller shall,

drilling three dozen lousy year. we've got people looting everywhere. with the second-largest world population of the country and folks are having oil spill in their backyard. you know what, sure there's complaints. people don't like the water trucks for the hydro for hacking going on and it's disrupted because there's lots of economic dignity of the rows are getting beat up because he think every trucks. look at wealthy and producing energy and would have been a natural gas prices? when i was in the united states senate got as high and will be there for as long as we can be. people are start moving back to america and producing things that natural gas like chemicals are an important component because they're stable natural gas prices. if we have a president that goes out and we have 263 years according to the congressional research service at this rate of extraction to double the rate of extraction would still have 130

years left of oil in this country. refining new without you because shell a new oil line. technologies able to get to reserves we want to get to. >> is there anything off limits anywhere? >> no. look, we can drill -- come to pennsylvania. we are drilling oil and gas wells all of the people and peoples backyards and aside from the fact that particular the hydro franking of two or three works of intense activity in striking the stone to release the gas company you have a pump in the ground. people live with this and have lucrative with it for years and years. this is not a dangerous sect tvd, not inherently dangerous activity. have any deep into can wire or seen pictures and wire? people say iowa is flat. the rocky mountains compared to

transcendent. it's frozen 10 months out of the year. we are drilling oil around children and all these things and that's okay, but we can't go but there's a caribou that walks by there every other year? that makes no sense at all. you have a president to as an energy crisis and he's saying that a caribou walks by there every now and then and we can't do something good for our country and our economy? that's rigid ideology. i don't know. i mean, i just don't understand how people can sit there and say this is a rational policy, that we can sacrifice the economy of this country. you're worried about people drilling on the shore. you worry about their uninsurance.

i'll get you uninsurance. who can produce more oil? a lot more people would be insured, but i suspect there's some who say we can't do that because of the caribou. and don't come and talk to me about being concerned about the uninsured. you can't have it both ways. you have to look at what is rational and reasonable. the president is an ideologue who is driven by a belief that we need to have less and we need to be -- government needs to be rationing resources. >> is the government doing anything to stimulate jobs quite >> energy policy is first and foremost that i proposed now is was traveling around iowa is to get manufacturing back. i grew up in pennsylvania, a little steel town. most of my friends have good middle income salaries and it was what created a staple healthy place for kids to grow up. back when i was growing up which

won 1% of the population in manufacturing the town tonight and i think that is the reason we've lost a great middle and have folks who have lost insurance because we don't make things here. we still make a lot of things come about because the technology. the people necessary to make those things has reduced, which means which make more for keep levels that. of course you hear about outsourcing and products being developed here and that the the manufactured somewhere else. well, what i said is we want to make sure the chops come here. i mentioned earlier with natural gas, which is heavily used by industry been stable and long-term, now we have one of the teams and if we can do the same thing with oil, we would have to things that actually is an incentive for manufacturing to come here because manufacturer users uses energy much higher than businesses. we can create lower energy prices increase stability over time. through on top of that a

competitive environment for them to be able to be successful. well, i'm done now. i proposed a 0% corporate tax and on manufacturing in this country. he will say to manufacturers who want to manufacture here, not just for markets, but for other markets that we will now create a tax system that you can do that. one of the big problems we have our exporters and our tax system doesn't measure -- doesn't blend well with other countries around the world who have back taxes. so we are at a competitive disadvantage because of our tax structure. gearing up the corporate taxable and a competitive disadvantage and encourage people to come here not just to make, but you know when i was a huge x for its state at the very important element of increasing the quality quality in the energy. >> before we get off energy, what to ask about ethanol. aside from the tax issue come is

variable for ethanol in this country? is ethanol not good or is that that interview? >> you know, i try not to say good or bad. i say what the market would dictate and what i've said this while energy producers i get folks to come talk to me about wind and solar. my feeling is we should let the market work on energy and encourage production. i'm for more energy production. i'm for it and obviously we can create a market where we can get through things like allowing expanded drilling in things like that, then i think live a much more robust energy. >> maybe he would oppose the tax incentives. >> what i said on s&ls the phases out the blended coverage. they are concerned about distribution, so i signed off on this for the house sent dedicated to expand distribution

i understand there is an inherent problem with access to market with ethanol because of the folks who basically on the distribution chains in this country, which is the oil companies. so you'd like to say that the market work, but when the distribution of a product is controlled by a competitor of the product, then i think that's a legitimate place for government to step in and say we have to provide access to a commodity that should be in the market place. and what i have learned, and i learned a lot, many things have been a big help. they see steve you're a conservative. how does that work? it's amazing. he said because i had a little permit course from him and some of the folks who helped her with talking about the dramatic technological advances made in ethanol to make it more competitive and make it a product we can actually compete on the market. every time i meet with a group of ethanol folks i say you guys

do as bad of a job as anyone i've seen. everywhere you go, whether new hampshire, south carolina, to this, pennsylvania, ethanol is a boondoggle. it's an energy consumer, this, that. they say he know that was true back when i was voting against it in the ethanol subsidies back in the 90s, when basically people produce ethanol, but it's not true anymore. and so i stood up in that i feel like an aa meeting. i'm going to vote against ethanol subsidies, so i did because it's the kind they did make sense. but he credited the industry, they've done a lot to improve the efficiency and technology and i knew i was on the right track racing ethanol as a viable source, that al gore came back and said it wasn't. so that confirmed to me that were probably heading down the right path and in fact i think

it does have a role in the energy mix. but what i said to them in oil and gas as they are going to have a level playing field. we are going to treat every business equally, which means that, you know, every business will get like every other business depreciation. all the things he do as far as tax treatment for any other business should be given to the energy industry, that should get extra credits for extra things beyond what a normal business would be in the operation. they can write off advertising, depreciate as i've come to do things that normal tax, tax treatment, the no extra tax treatments for the industry. >> wishes take you back to the question -- [inaudible] what do you say to families where both parents work outside the home? should the wife stay home and take care of the children? >> i'm not going to make that decision for