ones that have to struggle through the process, and they are the ones that have to fight through the inability for systems to work together. i think that more of us in uniform and those of us who are in the department can do a better job of articulating requirements, stating those requirements, and working closely with research community and with industry to make sure that we get those systems delivered quickly and can work our way through rapid fielding because it's so important at this time because i really do believe that in few times in history have we been presented with technological opportunity in the way that we are today, particularly in the area of unmanned systems, and where we vice president shifted our

operational thinking and our operational construct, and we have to get our heads around that and make sure that we're addressing that in the right way. i think that to just close with a couple of points that remain of great importance to me. you all were there last year when i cast the net widely to continue the pursuit of high density underwater power. that clearly is something that will be a game changer for us, and i encourage and i thank all of those who have been part of bringing options to the navy so that we can look at what the best way ahead is and just in the short time that we have been advocating for increased power, we have seen the times rise markettedly, and we need to continue to do that. i think that there should be increased attention paid on the

use of open architecture and how we can take advantage of that. again, to increase the rapid fielding of these systems. as i've always said from the very beginning, there's no such thing as an up manned system -- unmanned system, that there will always be people in the loop, in the process, in some numbers in some way, and the environment in which we are going to be in whether it's the risk environment, the nature of anti-access strategies, or the fiscal environment that we are going to be in. we can want afford to simply take an operator out of a vehicle, declare victory when we put 50 additional people in the backroom. the cost of people in the future will only continue to rise, and we have to be sure the systems

put together, the integration, the interoperatability takes advantage how do you bring down the number of people associated with operating the systems in which we will bet on for the future. i would say that with all of the challenges and with all of the rubs and shortcomings that i have highlighted, i do believe that we, in the navy, have remaiminged our future. we have restructured ourselves. we have put the right leadership in place to take us there, and, again, i appreciate the work that is done in all dimensions of this exciting area that will help us deliver on that promise of technology, that promise of technology that is not an end to itself, but the technology that must be integrated into how we will take our forces into the future, how we will take our

forces anywhere on the planet where we want to go for the good of the nation, and operate in app integrated -- in an intreg -- integrated, in a safe environment with our friends. and partners wherever they may be. i thank you for your time, efforts, and i'd like to open it up to any questions you may have. thank you very much. [applause] thank you. [applause] sir, -- over here. >> got you, okay. >> at the beginning of the speech you think the budget climate drives the development of systems. i wondered if you can elaborate on that particularly in the light of what you said there kind of making a business case for reducing the number of personnel. >> yeah. i think the budget environment will drive the development as

long as we see them as an intreg grated force with our manned systems. for example, and i'll use the underwater world as a where i put a lot of thought and effort in recently. i believe unmanned underwater systems become extensions to the submarine, can be extensions to aviation, manned or unmanned as far as sensing the battle extend your sensing area with unmanned systems, my initial reaction is we can get there more cheaply than if i have to buy many of the more manned systems that also reduces the risk to personnel, and it also reduces the cost of those

personnel that we may have to have out on limited duration unlike manned systems do. they can be more persist tent in the battle space, and so that's where i think as we look at how do we want to structure the fleet, how do we want to build the programs that i believe we can get more bang for the buck by integrating the unmanned into the manned networks. yes, ma'am >> >> dr. robin murphy. the navy has such a wonderful humanitarian disaster relief with medicine and trapt -- transporting supplies. what do you see the unmanned underwater vehicles using for disasters? >> i think, for example, you can use the up manned underwater systems to sample water in the event of a disaster, not unlike

what we saw in fukushima where as you saw in the press, there were concerns about contaminants. there's no question that as you conduct a major humanitarian operation whether it's the tsunami from indonesia -- i recently returned from chile where i spent time in the office where the bottom of the ocean shifted so much and as you try to close and bring in significant amounts of aid and you don't know what the bottom is like anymore, what the depths are, i would rather be able to send in some unmanned systems that can sense that bottom, can map the bottom, can provide the information that tells us where to go, where not to go so i think that can be huge, and i would say that those are some of the areas that show great

promise, and quite frankly, the technology is there today to be able to do that. thank you. yes, sir, in the back. >> thank you, sir, for coming to speak to us. i'm greg from dragon fly pictures. we develop rotorcraft, and i'm interested on your thoughts on a ship board aircraft, the trade between larger, more capable, more costly aircraft versus more presentful, less costly aircraft. >> yeah, thank you. i think that was one the other areas where a couple of years ago we made another decision that is reflected in our programs that you see today. there was, early on i believe what i call the explosion of unmanned air systems that everyone wanted # to get into the game of most active system

at the time, and as i looked at the budget and the capabilities that we had, and i began to look at the future that we would een -- encounter and for me it was important that we in the navy focused on our strength which is coming from the sea so we were investing in airborne systems that acquire us to be ashore, that required us to have additional manpower structure to be ashore, that require the us to be able to train those people how you live ashore. we're good at living at sea, and we've done it for awhile now, and are comfortable there as well, and so we made the decision that the unmanned systems that we would pursue with the exception of bans would come from the sea because as i

mentioned in the beginning of my remarks, that offshore option is going to become increasingly important. it's going to become increasingly important for two reasons. the introduction of antiaccess area of denial strategies and systems where there will be an effort to keep military forces out of a particular area and naval forces that offshore option allows you to move, to flex to a different axis, but it's also going to be important politically because i believe the future will be one where the sensitivities of sovereignty, a nation's desire to control its own land, to be able to focus on that which is theirs, that the idea of large foot prints

ashore, bases ashore, improved facilities ashore may not always be guaranteed as we have become used to over the past years, and so the ability to have these mobile u.s. sovereign bases whether you call them aircraft carry your or rotorcraft that you can use as a landing field a small spot in the ocean, i think that's going to become increasingly important. the question on the different sizes and the and the cost relative to the sizes will be one in my mind of tradeoffs and payload and of een diewrns, and that's -- endurance, and that's how we'll look at that future, but the fact is we have a lot of airfields in the navy that have very small landing areas. that's why the rotor aircraft

comes into play. can we get more pay load? can we get more range? can we get more speed? that's wheric we have to go -- that's where i think we have to go, but the vertical landing and takeoff will continue to be important to us because the large number of landing fields that we field in the navy, that's sovereign u.s. territory that we don't have to ask for rights, we don't have to ask for basing rights or ask for access. it's there. we can put it wherever we want it. yes, sir? >> admiral roughhead, i'm david plait, support third fleet, an operator in uas since the early days of ac6 and pioneers. >> uh-huh. >> first of all, a complement, sir. over the last 20 years, you have

by far been the most impressive and motivational when the comes to unmanned system, and i admire your admission. >> thanks. >> first of all, how would you like to see the acquisition process improve to expedite the development in fielding of unmanned systems, and on the fielding side, could you share with us your thoughts on how -- you mentioned the fire scouts. we do scan eagle attachments aboard ships, but what are your thoughts on how to expedite more forward deployment forces? >> yeah, thank you. first off, i would say that we really need to take a look at -- this is now in the acquisition system. i think we need to take a look at how we can getter engage with, collaborate with industry early on. i think we sense ourselves

away. my experience has also been that even though our friends in industry say we'd like to collaborate more, when i say i'm bringing company x and y along with company z, then even industry kind of gets a little sensitive because of proprior propriortary information, and the like, and i can understand. we have to figure out a way to be able to do that, and we have to take a look at the constraints, both official and cultural, that inhibit that from happening. i would also say that we should look at ways to work our way through the operational tests and evaluation process faster with less cost. i don't, fora moment, get cavalier about safety issues for our people or effectiveness, but

i really do think that we have pure rocktized that process to fairly well, and we have to think on how we miewf -- move things more quickly. i'll cite the example of what we wanted to do with the next role of the up manned carrier aircraft where we put a challenge out to our navy and to the department at large, and up deed to industry where we said we would deploy a squad yet to be defined as far as numbers go, on an aircraft carrier to operate by 2018. there was a time in our country when we elected to put a man on the moon in ten years, and it became a passion.

it became a matter of national pride. in the case of putting a squadron of unmanned aircraft on a carrier in eight years, it was doomed too fast, and i think that we've got to get ourselves out of that mind set of too fast to cop form to a -- conform to a process as opposed to saying we can do this, and then we mobilize the resources that we have and the intellectual power we have in the industrial agility that we have to do it, but up stead, we have retreated to a bureaucratic process that, in my mind, is an inhibitive. i'll stop there because i can feel myself getting a little pumped up here, so -- [laughter] >> good morning. >> morning. >> good morning, sir, university of washington of political science. >> great, you're right at home here, aren't you, with all the

techies? >> not really, no, sir. it's been interesting. i was wondering with the changes the navy is spearheading, what efforts is the knave sigh engaged for integrated unmanned systems since the new battle space? >> yeah. one of the things that we've done, and i don't want to up flat this bigger than it is, but when we created our way ahead in what we call information dominance, the restructuring of our staff and navy to the director of information dominance, the reactivation of the 10th fleet for global cyber operations, and the organization of all of our people in the navy who deal in the world of information into an information dominance core, those are the three things that tended to be the main points of this strategy

of our way ahead, but there's an obscure thing that we did that many people are not aware of, and that is that within the office of the judge advocate general, we created another element in there that deals with the law, and from that law, how we deal with rules of engagement which really get to the ethics, the escalation, deescalation mechanisms in conflict to be able to begin to think our way through that because i think whether you're talking in unmanned systems or in terms of cyber activity, we're putting a lot of effort, a lot of talk, a lot of money into the technical side -- excuse me -- and we're not looking enough at the policy

side which gets to your question so by creating and then educating people in this new area of warfare and the roles of warfare was how we came at that. i think that the more complex of the two clearly is the cyber dimension simply because of the body of laws that we deal with and how do you work your way through that. i think in many cases that we're making a bit more out of the ethics of unmanned than i see, and i look forward to having time to explore that on my own, but i think that we're making more of that than what it should be at this point. over on the right -- thank you

very much. >> hello, sir. i'm from sweden. thank you for taking the thyme to come here and talk -- time to come here and talk to us. i have a question regarding the arctic. sweden now is the chair of the arctic counsel. >> right. >> can you elaborate a little on what the navy, what the challenges are you see in the arctic and the opportunities for unmanned systems. the arctic is getting a lot of attention especially for energy right now. >> uh-huh. >> and, of course, so is strategic areas so may i ask that? thank you. >> thank you very much, and i would also say that the arctic is getting a lot of attention in the navy about three years ago. we established a task force on climate change, not just to address the arctic, but the changes that will take place around the planet and how it affects the maritime domain. where will it induce potential sources of conflict?

where will it provide potential areas of cooperation? the arctic is one that we have had significant focus on in these past couple of years, and i think initially as i see it, the first press up in that region will be for fishing as the fish follow the colder water and go up there, and this will then lead to questions of how do you mop tore and how do nations enforce their rights in the regimes and the arctic areas. there will also likely be increased search and rescue activities so to the question that was posed earlier, can you use unmanned systems to enhance your ability toceps and respond to search and rescue, as you get into the next step, which i think is going to be the

exploration and mineral extraction and oil and gas extraction, how do you make sure that you're able to monitor the environmental issues, and i think unmanned systems can provide great information so that we can better understand what we're doing to the environment as many of these activities are taking place, and then our estimate is that in about 25 years, you'll have a viable and a profitable transportation route across the top of planet, they call it the opening of the 5th ocean, and in there, what sort of communication schemes do you need? what sort of sensing schemes do you need? i believe even as we look at an opened arctic, the conditions up there are still going to be harsh, challenging, and it's still going to be quite cold which will challenge the human

dimension to be able to operate up there for any great length of time, and, again, i think this is an area where unmanned systems can play, not necessarily as a system of military capability, but one of sensing information and community cation that in that harsh environment, it will be the optimum way to approach the problem, but clearly a very focused area for us, and i appreciate the leadership and the intellectual effort that is taking place on behalf of your country, and what is truly going to be an extraordinary moment in the history of man kind as that ocean opens. it's the first ocean to up since the end of the ice age which i consider to be a pretty big deal. well, thanks very much. thank you for work that you do, and i look forward to following

the great work of this organization and all of who are involved in unmanned systems. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. [applause] >> c-span was in arlington, virginia today on army navy drive as the 9/11 foundation motorcycle riders passed through washington, d.c. paying tribute at the crash sites of the terrorist attacks in september 11, 2001. they rallied at dawn in pennsylvania, and road to the memorial to the united flight 93 and almost 200 motorcycles crossed into maryland at mid-morning riding south into virginia and the pentagon and heading on their way to new york city raising money for scholarships for children of police and firefighters of the

9/11 foundation, and here's a look at that ride. [background sounds] [[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds]

[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds] >> just taking a look earlier at the motorcyclists riding through the northern virginia suburbs near washington, d.c. and the pentagon heading to the 9/11 crash sites in pennsylvania, virginia, and new york. more rallies are expected tomorrow as the bikers continue their trip rolling north through baltimore along the interstate to delaware.

[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds]

[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds] >> a look at some of the riders, the america's 9/11 riding through virginia raising money for children of first responders who arrived on the scene of the

crash on 9/11. on sunday, they plan to arrive at the 9/11 site for a replaying and a world ceremony.

>> it is a country fraught with corruption, natural disasters and islamic extremists. >> what was shocking to me and many people in pakistan was these assassinations were welcomed, were congratulated by many pakistani. these are not terrorists, not al qaeda up lead crystal ordinary pakistani who feel their religion is threatened, that the country was becoming too secular, that the islamic values are under attack and blasphemy which is anything that insults' the profits or islam is to be defended with your life. >> washington post correspondent pamela constable on c-span's q&a. >> last month current and former members of the house financial services committee attended did hosted by the u.s. capitol

historical society. we will hear the keynote address from committee chairman michael oxley, republican from ohio. this is an hour. >> it worked! ladies and gentlemen, if i may have your attention please. please continue to eat and enjoy your coffee and dessert. good evening. i am the president of the u.s. capitol historical society and former member of congress from connecticut. our celebration of the financial services committee is possible because of the ongoing support of society members and generous additional support of several donors. they are listed near the end of your printed program. thank you for advancing the mission of the society. [applause]

>> the committee has produced landmark legislation over the past 146 years. the o and class act, glass-steagall act, national housing act and so many more. the committee has been shared by members of congress whose names commonly appear in history textbooks. carter glass, lewis mcfadden and henry stiegel. it is a pleasure to introduce the current leaders of the committee, chairman spencer bachus and barney frank. [applause] chairman bachus who were occupies the sixth district served on the committee for 18 years. he was ranking member for four years before becoming chairman and the beginning of the 100

twelfth congress. he is the second member from alabama to chair the committee. the first being henry stiegel who became chairman in the years ago during the great depression. chairman bachus has grappled with the financial crisis of the recent recession and worked to improve living standards for impoverished people throughout the world. his dedication has been recognized by bachus -- oxley america. please welcome chairman bachus. [applause] >> thank you. when time was discharged from the armies they wanted to give me a disability for hearing loss and i told them i didn't have hearing loss.

then i got to thinking maybe i would like to get my pension or something if there was disability. i said what would have to do? they said you have to wait three weeks. i said i am out of here. i didn't get my disability for hearing but i do have a hearing loss. you probably noticed the can and, this room is one of the toughest as far as hearing. from what i heard of that introduction, thank you. [applause] i enjoyed talking to ron. thank you for talking to the historical society about what you do. many people worked very hard to put this dinner on. it is a wonderful opportunity for linda and i to be here.

i would not be chairman of the financial services committee or even ranking member for mike oxley who gave me the opportunity to advance through the committee. it is great to be here to honor you and great to see you all. also barney frank. he and i have a mutual agreement that if either of us get in trouble in a campaign we will go to our respective states and campaigned against each other. [laughter] he and our and our staffs have an excellent working relationship. our press officers don't have a good relationship.

i have enjoyed -- jim leach probably isn't here tonight. growing up, jim leach was a model person to chair the committee as was like. i learned a lot from barney frank. we didn't always agree, but i was always impressed with his professionalism. let me say this. this is a recognition of the committee, not of any one person. a committee functions well or not well based on the staff and we have got many staffers here, many of them were here under jim leach and a few under henry gonzalez. i would like all of our staffers to stand at this time. [applause]

when i say staffers i saw some of the former staffers and diamond former. they didn't stand up. half of the former staffers didn't stand but they are out there. i think mike and barney, you would agree a lot of our success and hard work is based on what the staff has done. also i would like to say that the most wonderful thing about being a member of congress, it is kind of a ministry. you get to help people but you meet some wonderful people. if i go home and tell people i was sitting next to the chairman and ceo of grand foreign who headed up their chinese

operation for nine years, people are very impressed with that. i am very impressed with that. we talked for a few minutes about our ideas of china and the one child policy. to have that kind of conversation, to interact with people that are so knowledgeable and have so much experience in different fields is an incredible thing. it is an enriching experience and it is a wonderful thing. we have several members of our committee. democrats and republicans, if you are a committee member would you stand? [applause]

we really -- by listening to fox news or ms nbc you would think we all hate each other. we really don't. our wives are friends and we will be going to russia next month and really looking forward to that. para maloney, we have worked on many issues together. one of the greatest successes came with flood insurance last week with no no vote last week. from time to time we managed to compromise. which is a good thing. always feel good when you can get an agreement. no one always gets everything they want. anyway, i am going to close by telling you a quick story.

2001, michael oxley -- to start before that i was on a committee with newt gingrich, david dreier and five others who decided we are going to reorganize the committee. and we are going to make a committee out of financial services. part of how we were going to do that is we had billy cozan and michael oxley moving to financial services and by was going to help out. it was going ok, then danny a r astrich became the speaker and the energy and commerce committee persuaded him, john dingell and others to pull back and not give us a lot of jurisdiction. so they decided to put it to a

vote of the conference. you can imagine john dingell was on the democratic side. we took the majority. the entire conference to decide. the day before michael oxley said to me, he said since i am on energy and commerce i will let you give financial services -- you will give the speech for financial services. we got before the conference and the day before the speaker and other people were working for the energy and commerce committee. the night before -- this shows you about good staff work. the staff said to me look at all this stuff on the energy and commerce web site. this is the start of the internet. would you put on a web site is there. what it basically said the

energy and commerce committee was the most powerful committee in congress. there was not one issue they didn't have jurisdiction over and basically any issues they exercise jurisdiction, they actually had examples. they laid out examples. you might think the judiciary was in charge of wiretapping but we have taken that over. you might think pork bellies are agricultural but you would be wrong. it is energy and commerce. they went down the list. i got up at the conference. we didn't know who was going to win and i said we have new freshmen here and i want to point you on the jurisdictions of the committee and i said to do you think has pork bellies? they said agriculture. i said no. you would be wrong. it was energy and commerce. i was going down a list and

finally billy tozan said this is funny but not true. i don't know where he gets this from. and we passed out the information from the web site and we got all these votes on everyone else including six members of energy and commerce. [laughter and applause] mike was one of those six votes. so thank you very much for honoring the committee and its staff. let me recognize two people. larry lavender is my chief of staff. [applause] if you don't think this guy is really extraordinary, i am not

going to tell you what his age is but he has a 7-month-old baby at home and somebody didn't leave it on the doorstep. my wife, linda, who is my best friend -- [applause] -- if anybody wants to do advertisements of a grandmother with five grandchildren, pact and linda are available. so thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. the thing that has been proven tonight is larry lavender has beaten me. i have two boys. one is 12 and the other is 49.

and he has a child that's 7 months old. how old? and another one that is 37. higher recognize my master. now it is my pleasure to introduce my friend barney frank. he is the ranking member of the committee, was chairman from 2007-2010 and he too has tackled the difficult economic and financial issues facing the country in recent years including the sub prime mortgage crisis and the financial regulatory reform issues. congressman frank has been singled out as the most eloquent member of congress by capitol hill staff. in surveys conducted by washingtonian magazine and in the same surveys hill staff noticed his great wit and humor.

congressman frank represents the fourth district of massachusetts. ranking member frank, we look forward to hearing from you. ladies and gentlemen, congressman barney frank. [applause] >> that humor thing is judged on degree of difficulty. when you have to make jokes about derivatives it is a little bit harder. i am glad to share this with spencer. we worked closely together and there are areas of disagreement but some areas where we worked together. he mentioned his hearing defect. i will acknowledge are also have a hearing aspect, severe disadvantage to me. namely i sit there as chairman

and ranking member and i can hear everything people say. that is not the most desirable condition. i would be glad to borrow a little package from time to time. it is great to be here and i want to particularly follow spencer and the wonderful people who work with us and the staff director ever since i became ranking member. i want to make the point one of the great things the american people don't know is what a bargain they get from the extraordinarily talented, dedicated people who work hard jobs here for as much money as they can make elsewhere and put up with all the stress. [applause]

i will be a little bit political. my colleagues want to wear old clothes and talk about how we are denying things but leave the staff alone. they deserve better than to be the object of political cheap shots because as spencer mentioned we had staff and there's one difference. the former staff are richer than the staff. i don't regret the former staff. i resent that we are unable to treat people who work for this country better than we do. spencer was gracious in acknowledging jim leach. without michael oxley he would not have gotten to the ranking member. let me also acknowledge the willingness of the state legislature of new york to act against his state's economic interests. if they had redistricting in 2002 i wouldn't have gone to be the chairman.

why a state where financial industry is the number one industry would knock out the guy who would be chairman of the committee are don't know and i am not questioning it. i am just the beneficiary. it didn't seem smart to me but what do i no? the other thing i would note, one president was chairman of the committee, james garfield. the second shortest tenure as president but he still was president. i don't think any committee has ever had before. spencer sits on a republican side with three declared presidential candidates. ron paul, michele bachman and thaddeus mccarter. they have primary in their caucus. the committee's work is challenging and important and we are grateful to the people who are here to help us figure it

told a story about how the committee was formed and michael oxley had a major role and ron told the old joke, the jokes that have seniority much was the members

about people taking michael oxley and sarbanes but as i told mike john dingell -- john dingell -- he credits mike with having divided the committee. that is where we are. is an extraordinarily interesting committee. it is a combination of some of the most difficult political issues that we have and some of the most complex intellectual. the financial situation is a very hard thing to do. it is complicated right now by the fact the we have some ideological differences but spencer is right that it does not get in the way of personal relationships and we do work to try and reach agreement. we will try doing it on others. in this end all of us would say

and mike, and a great chairman -- of all the people i served with i must tell you i was most profoundly affected by henry gonzalez who was chairman of the committee and whose passion for fairness in this country was so enormous. when paul wolfowitz was no longer going to be head of the world bank alan greenspan invited me to be ranking member and it did seem to me as some of the snow he invited me -- he is ranking member and you better invite him. it seemed to meet inviting me had appeared to be a better idea when he invited me than when i showed up. i did not feel i was getting the full focus of his attention.

hy said what would be a good idea was why don't we see if we can get jim leach to be head of the world bank. he slipped and he said that is a great idea. this much is worth while. he would be president of the world bank -- i take it back. between him and wolfowitz, it was between him and with -- the bush administration was sure that jim held a democratic district. it went democratic and they did not want to have a special election in which democrats -- it would have been great president of the world bank. just to get back to the subject. it is an extraordinary privilege to be able to serve the people of the country here at all.

being chairman of the committee, it is a great honor. it is an honor that is only possible because our colleagues, staff, families and many of you who are in the business are so supportive. we are having our problems now but this country will get -- it works very well and to be part of this process is a great honor. so thank you and thanks to the members of the capitol hill society for letting us be reminded we have our day today issues but we do that within the context of this democratic experiment that has gone on so long and continues to inspire the world. [applause]

>> before i introduce michael oxley, i would like to ask a gentleman to say a few words and that gentleman is paul sarbanes, united states senator from maryland, 4 united states senator from maryland and chairman of the senate banking committee, 30 year veteran of the united states senate and colleague of mine when i served in the house of representatives. paul? [applause] >> thank you very much. i apologize for intruded into the house program. you always have to be very careful but i am not in office any more so it doesn't matter as much. i very much -- over the years i worked with the house committee on so many different occasions and it was always a very positive and constructive -- my

problem was more on my side of the capital and on this side of the capital. i know that my namesake was going to speak here tonight and i wanted to hear michael oxley. people in ohio are wondering why he changed his first name and people in maryland are wondering why i have a hyphenated last name at the end of my career. are you going to tell that other story? i won't tell it. i will just set it up for you. mike has a great story coming so i want you to be on alert to listen. i want to affirm and emphasize the remarks that were made about the staff of the committee. we depend very much on our staff. i am going tomorrow morning

before the senate banking committee to introduce marty u gruenberg who is nominated to the chairman of the fdic by sheila bair. he is currently the vice-chairman and he served on the -- he started in the house side and served for many years on the staff of the senate banking committee and now he will be the chair of the fdic. when he first went down there, you have to have a balance on these multi member commission's. only a certain number can come from the same party. that is true of the fcc and the fdic. marty got down there. he had only been there for three months and the chairman, don powell was a close friend of president bush's and stepped down as chairman to go to texas

on the disaster recovery efforts going on in texas. and marty became the chairman. acting chairman. within four months of getting to the fdic. so i am reading the american banker next morning. i don't do that anymore but when i was -- i read that marty is acting chairman. i said i just read in the paper you have only been down there for four months. you are the acting chairman of the fdic. he gives an embarrassed laugh and says yes. is this a great country or what? but i do want to underscore the remarks by spencer and barney about the staff. they do a terrific job.

they are incredibly dedicated people. a lot of the abuse of members take spilled out on the staff regrettably and i just want to thank them as they have already been thanks very much for the contributions they make. i served in the house for three terms and i didn't really run for the senate to get out of the house like some members do. i like the house actually. i really did. i look back on those days with great fondness and i am pleased to be back with you this evening and i am looking forward to my name's sake and his comments here tonight. thank you very much. [applause] >> it is my great pleasure to welcome michael oxley back to the committee as our keynote

speaker. michael oxley was the first chairman of the financial services committee when it was established in 2001 with jurisdiction over all financial service industries. from the beginning of the committee had a full agenda. in the first two year that conducted hearings on terrorist financing, insurance regulation, internet gambling and corporate accounting practices just to name a few. the committee produced landmark legislation. the sarbanes oxley act is an example. the consensus is the sweeping reform has been successful in curbing accounting fraud, making financial statements more transparent and holding corporate executives and directors accountable. despite the demands of the job might found time to have fun. he was the manager of the republican congressional baseball team for eight years and posted a winning record of seven -- of 7-1.

[applause] the annual competition was held last week. i won't mention the score but the republicans need you. congressman michael oxley. [applause] >> thank you very much. welcome to all of you. wonderful to be here, to see so many friends. it is like a high school or college reunion without having to look at pictures in the old year book. particularly to thank spencer and barney and paul sarbanes. it is tough to follow particularly spencer and barney because there two of the funniest guys in the house. they are well known. to follow them is quite a

burden. before i forget, i do this sometimes. even though i am not in office, if you don't introduce your lovely wife, behalf -- pat, good to have you with us. somebody turned the air conditioner way up. i want to echo what spencer and barney said about the staff. we introduced the current staff. let's have the former staffers stand and be recognized. we have a lot of oxley alums here. don't be bashful. [applause] what they said i could act 0.

echo. they have gone on to other things. still come back here many times for camaraderie and remembering what a wonderful experience we had when we were here. paul sarbanes, i want to tell a couple stories. when we started this process it became known as sarbanes oxley. we were the first committee to have a hearing on the enron scandal. and ron -- and ron --enron was the second largest corporation in america. all the leaders of enron, it was the best company to work for, on and on. a lot of people bought stock. most people who were selling stock didn't recommend it.

they would get sued for malpractice in those days. it was a very popular company. early in 2001 they came out with the strongest code of ethics of any company in the history of america. by that summer they had filed a restatement of earnings and by december filed bankruptcy. and our committee in lame duck session had at first hearing on enron. we came back in 2002 and introduced the corporate account affiliate's responsibility and transparency act. that was something clever the staff thought of. it never quite caught on like sarbanes oxley did. we passed the legislation. we later had a hearing if you

will recall on worldcom. jetblue the lid off because enron was the story for a long time. worldcom was four times larger. and bernie evers, the ceo, only time i had to sign a subpoena was for bernie and scott sullivan to appear before the committee. lishv a speech i

finally got its chance to work with high paul sarbanes. paul had taken over chairmanship of the banking committee when the senate changed. and jim jeffords became an independent and paul ended up as chairman of the banking committee. when the bill went over to paul they dealt with it over there and that is how we ended up working together. a lot of people say sarbanes oxley was passed in haste. it was eight months. you could have the staffers that worked on it. that with a long eight month that we worked on that legislation. congress admittedly work fast by congressional standards but it was in the wall street journal periodicals' saying it was

rushed through. we have a lot of fun with it. we worked hard. the outcome has been we haven't had major accounting scandal in nine years since the act was passed and signed by president bush. we are proud of what we were able to accomplish with more transparency and accountability. i got to tell this story first. the senate is the greatest deliberative body in the world and they do it very well. paul was very meticulous about holding hearings and held a number of hearings on the issue of accounting fraud and one of the hearings was on accounting principles and he had three panels talking about a counting all day long. a witness or a member sitting in

the third panel know what i am talking about. also saying the hell you are going to find, and paul tells the story about the last hearing, these people are talking about these arcane accounting principles and one of the senators forgot his microphone was live and he said this is the most boring hearing have ever been involved with. a senator from wyoming, a freshman, the only cpa in the senate came to his microphone and said i beg your pardon, this is the most fun i have had since i have been in the u.s. senate. where you stand is where you stand. i had the chance to go to the world economic forum the next

year, 2,003 and i was speaking at a dinner and had a reception at of time. we have our name tags on. this young fellow came over. he was staring at my name tag and he finally came over and offered his hand and said i want to shake hands with sarbanes oxley. is that what the you want to shake hands with sarbanes oxley? i never got to shake hands with blas steagall. it is a true story. true story. we have a lot of fun. that was one of my special memories. let me thank you and the u.s. capitol historical society for putting this on. you and tom and susie. susie was the one who invited

me. she brought along our good friend norm. good to see you. people asked if i missed this place and i tell them really, truly i missed two things -- i miss basketball in the house jim and i miss the congressional baseball game very much. that was one of those bipartisan nights we had but one thing a won't miss is after making one of those rare baskets, running to the an end screening huskies! [laughter] .net! the historical society has done great work. brown from ohio was your predecessor and i saw him the other night and wanted to pass along his best wishes to all of

you. a great friend and colleague. one of the reasons i got on the commerce committee the first time was because bud retired from congress and was running for governor of ohio and opened up a spot on the commerce committee for a republican from ohio and got elected. we are glad to be invited -- old war horses talk about the good old days and how great we were in the legislative arena. it is a wonderful experience to be here. i know that the speaker was going to be here and say some nice things about me. john boehner and are have been friends for 20 years. golfing partners and opponents of for that long. i trust him when he said he would say nice things about me.

i will never know, well i? he has nothing else on his mind and couldn't introduce his old buddy but i understand -- his good humor and steadiness, i think he will continue to be a great speaker. i don't know how many members are have talked to on both sides of the aisle who respect john. they don't necessarily agree with him. i certainly never did. at the same time recognize he has the best interests of his constituents, the state of ohio and the nation. he is doing a tough job in this situation and i wish i could tell it to his face.

[applause] i was thinking what barney was thinking about the committee. i remember one of the times i was chairman and barney was ranking member we had an interesting variety of members on the committee. for example on my side, we had ron paul. on barney's side we had maurice anders. we had the far right and the far left. as an matter-of-fact to this day bernie is the only admitted socialist in the congress and ron paul we all know where he is politically. i remember when we were talking about it, the privacy issues,

ron paul and bernie somehow met each other around the bend. we were like stunned that they had actually agreed and the rest of the committee was in the same funk. couldn't figure out what was going on. that made an interesting committee. that was a big committee. why did they shrink the committee a little bit? if it was why i could never get dennis has stirred to make it to the committee. to their credit, to barney's credit and nancy pelosi when the democrats took over they made it an exclusive committee. that continued for the freshmen and that is a good thing to do. the smaller committee and also a committee that has enormous breadth of background, every part of that great country is represented on the committee.

it was a microcosm of the house. i was proud to be a member, to be chairman of the committee for six years. one that i tried to do early on, i was chairman of the house subcommittee on finance and hazardous materials. remember that one? that was a cash and trash committee. we have jurisdiction over insurance, financial markets and hazardous materials. only in the commerce committee would you see that kind of jurisdiction. so the bargain i ended up taking the cash part left the trash with energy and commerce. we got into this big argument on

interstate waste. you remember when that barge was full of garbage? it was going up the east coast trying to find a place to land. can you imagine -- our committee had to get involved in that thing. i found out later that they were sending dead horses from central park to landfills in ohio. you can't make this stuff up. susan molinari thought that was a great idea. i finally took over the committee. so there was that committee across the hall.

couldn't bring himself to save a financial services committee. i have a trivia question for you. who do we have from the committee? a famous alumnus who ended up winning the presidency? this is the jeopardy question. you don't have to give it in the form of a question by the way. you wouldn't do that anyway. this banking committee chairman became president of the united states. james garfield. james garfield was chairman of the banking committee and ten years later ascended to the presidency and was elected in 1880. and of course a buckeye. are you taking notes, norman? by the way, the house -- i have been doing my homework. the house created the banking committee in 1865 after the

civil war. interestingly enough the senate deliberated on the possibility of having the banking committee and they got right to work on it and 50 years later created a banking committee -- [laughter] -- you can't make this stuff up. i couldn't resist poking a little fun. the biographer for garfield recounts the issues the banking committee had when he was chairman after the civil war. there was a massive national debt as a result of the war but at the same time a fund for reconstruction repeated south was needed. the wartime system of high tariffs had to be overhauled.

monetary policy and deflation -- inflation had to be addressed and paper currency and silver had to be issued by the treasury. when you are financial services committee chairman it is like another day at the office. the banking committee chairman garfield faced up 3 federal reserve of version of the monetary policy debate that continues to this day. from the biography, quote, of ohio was an important battleground state in the conflict between supporters of hard and soft money. garfield concluded to the dismay of many supporters that greenbacks should be reduced in quantity. we were talking issues of chairman garfield's time, the national debt the central questions still remain about money and currency. some things never change early in the jurisdiction of the

committee. people taking advantage of those less sophisticated or more trusting than themselves. our nation's true to their word? do they pay their bills? deal honestly with international partners or their own people? how do you achieve real growth that is not an inflationary bubble? what policies best address the recession? we have a tendency to think the creation of the federal reserve solved all those problems but we obviously know that that is not the case. too often we think of the early history of the country as a series of bank runs and panics, land speculation and regular currency that went away with the establishment of modern financial regulations. all of us know that is simply not the case. we had economic and fiscal crises quite regularly as we all know. think about the past few decades and what we have been through.

most of you look like you were adults during that period of time. think about the past. we had one day marked drop in 1987. remember that day? we had chrysler and the chrysler bailout. the mexican bailout of the peso. long-term capital management. remember all those smart guys putting together nobel prize winners? the s&l crisis. some of you were on the banking committee at the time, remember how difficult that was. during my chairmanship the tragedy of 9/11. not the tragedy, human tragedy but the economic loss we had to our country. the nasdaq and the stock exchange for closed for four days. longest time in the history of the country. think about that. we have to try to get back -- i

was proud to go to new york and open the stock exchange and the nasdaq when they opened the next monday and a lot of people worked hard to get that done but everybody was in shock and we lost a million jobs almost the immediately as a result of that and many of those jobs never came back and of course the recession that followed 9/11 and enron and adelphia and the other corporate scandals. our committee was in the middle of that. we should be proud of all of that. with the current jurisdiction today including banking, housing and monetary policy the committee has just over ten years old, quite a challenge for people like spencer and barney

who had been chairman as well. the committee's change made a lot of sense not just because you had two competing committee chairs but more importantly the changes taking place in our country in the financial realm. when i started in congress in 1981 financial sector represented 9% of our economy. by the time we dealt with wor c worldcom and enron had grown 30%. it had grown from 9% in the financial sector. people were investing. we created a new era of investing. we created an investor class in our country.

people who had heretofore put money in savings accounts were investing in america. they wanted to feel their investment would grow where they put some money aside and see it grow and maybe do a vacation or retire or send their kids to college. i know the members here would think about -- and i do -- i would talk to constituents. i would go to a company and say i got a 401(k). i am investing everything -- a little bit every month. i want my kids to go to college. they would be the first in our family to go to college. they were counting on those investments. imagine the shock and the loss of faith in the market. at the end of the day these

markets are based on trust. people put their hard earned money into a stock because they think everything is on the up and up. and afraid with what happened nine or ten years ago that the last couple years, that trust has been broken. you can see it in the numbers. you see it in the loss of the number of individual investors in our country. the potential is so great for them that they have to feel they are getting a fair shake. they felt they were being taken advantage of and the big guys, the insiders whether it was insider-trading or stock options or accounting fraud that they didn't want to play that game anymore. that is what the financial service committee is about, providing that kind of fairness

and understanding and restore faith in our country's investors. so the basis for stocks, transparency and accountability to restore investor confidence is what that was about. there is always going to be people who take advantage of the system but at the same time the committee has stepped up time and time again for what we want it to do and do it right. i want to say how much of a privilege is to work in the congress of the united states. only a few thousand of us in the history of our country have been fortunate enough to be elected by their friends and neighbors

and constituents to serve at the federal level. and people who give their longest years, potential highest earning years to stay in congress to make a difference i have always admired. norm dicks is one example of many. barney, spencer and some of the new members. you can learn a lot from these guys. doesn't make a difference if they have a d on their shirt, they respect the process and want to get things done for this country. that is what it is all about. mike was a new member of my committee. we had problems with credit rating agencies during sarbanes oxley. we decided for jurisdiction reasons we would deal with a

separate bill and we did. make fitzpatrick, a frenchman -- a freshman introduced the bill and we got it passed. mike learned the process and what you had to do to move the bill forward and it was an important piece of legislation to provide more competition in that arena. it has worked incredibly well. we have eight new entrants since the bill passed. one with the japanese company. all of you who worked with us whether you are lobbyists for media or staff, all have a special part of the history of this institution. we went back to 1865. we are still representing the american public and i am proud

to be here and thank you so much in the historical society. thank you very much. .. what [applause]

>> one thing i would like to say senator sarbanes, when i was up here i have a tremendous amount of respect for senator sarbanes. one thing i did see during sarbanes oxley is all to people reach across the ogle and the house and the senate and to gentleman really worked together to put it all together the might remind us today has made us a better country senator sarbanes, it means a lot to us on this side of the aisle for you to be here. [applause] >> sometimes people in our business show great pressures. mike oxley mentioned the title of the subcommittee he chaired

when he was an energy and commerce. do you think they knew at that time that financial services would turn out to be hazardous materials? [laughter] [applause] on behalf of the u.s. capitol historical society i want to thank you all for coming coming and for each of you this evening there is a gift. on your way out, please pick up the copy of the latest the 16th edition of we the people which is our capital guidebook, and the 2012 calendar, or annual calendar, which has a factoid from everyday of the year, 150 years ago during the civil war. so on your way out, please take them out on the desk. thank you very much for coming. [inaudible conversations]

>> si cementer was a northern virginia near the memorial as the americas 9/11 foundation motorcycle riders visited the crash site from the turner was a tax of september 11th, 2001. the group rallied at dawn in pennsylvania. the road to the memorial to the united flight 93 in your shanks fell. about 2,000 crossing into meurlin at midmorning and heading south to virginia and the pentagon. the ride is raising money for scholarships for children of police and rescue workers coming in here is a look at part of that right today.

[honking]

[sirens and honking] [sirens and honking] some of the riders heading for the suburbs of washington, d.c. near the pentagon visiting fun 9/11 crash sites in pennsylvania, virginia and new york. on the group website they say they hold this annual rite in august to respect each site and

the survivors allowing them to mourn during september. more revenues are expected tomorrow as they continue their trip on to the world trade center site for the memorial ceremony.

according to a national survey on public opinion about america's public schools, almost three out of four americans have trust and confidence in public school teachers. we will hear more about that now

during this 20 minute event hosted by gallup polling company and george washington university. >> welcome. good afternoon. my name is shane and lopez and i want to welcome you to the review of the public perception of the u.s. education. in the past year we conducted to polls, one with our partners at pdk and the foundation examining what americans think about education from kindergarten through higher education. you're going to hear a lot about the statistics today and about the 2,000 americans the told the story of the rest of the americans and what they think about it occasions i want to start by grounding you a little bit. you will hear a great deal about great teachers, and a good deal about the value of an education.

so, in the beginning of our time together, because we are spending a lot of time together, the next two hours or so, i want you to think about your best teacher. just take a snapshot of that person in your mind. and then also think about the value of the education you've received over the years. so that a great teacher and the value of the education that you received over the years just as a way of introducing myself, i will talk a little bit about my favorite teacher. this was my fourth grade science teacher, and for some reason, she read to us where the red fern grows every day before recess, so if we got on with our science work on time, we got to hear about these wonderful dogs and a little boy and was a wonderful story. then there was understood why the science teacher was reading a book to us.

years later when we did get connected again at the elementary school we all talked about the hurt and how she motivated us to get our work done and to stay interested in science. regarding the value of education i want to publicly thank the many folks who loaned me money for my own education. and thank them for all the years they've given me to pay back that money. and we will assure more about that later today. but first, i'd like to hear from the dena of this wonderful graduate school of education and human development, dr. michael foyer. [applause] >> thanks very much, shame. welcome to george washington university. it's a great pleasure. i'm delighted to have this chance to host such a wonderful event. i know we have a number of folks here from the press, who i'm

going to do the wire, when and why in my three minutes. first, where you are. you are in the jack morton auditorium of the george washington university, which was founded in 1821 by an act of congress to fulfill a great dream of president washington to establish an institution in the nation's capital to prepare leaders for the future. that's where you are. when are you here? well, timing is really everything or it is at least important. if this event had been scheduled for just nine days from today, chances are there would have been no room in this building and no parking in the neighborhood. because that is lamb we would bear witness to what i have always felt is one of the uniquely american education rituals that takes place all

across the land around this time of year. on august 27th, if you are nearby, you will have the chance to observe one of our most delightfully and optimistic and hopeful and hallowed traditions when roughly 2300 members of the class of 2015 arrive here many of them accompanied by their proud parents and grandparents and envious younger siblings tumbling out of their station wagons, i know we don't have station wagons any more. [laughter] that's the way that i remember this event. carrying backpacks, in the old days was stereo equipment, and now it's small iphone, ipad, and other such devices, along with their trunks and they would be met by a party groups of males and upper-class men and women who would help them to get oriented to their new home where they would spend about four

years. our class of 2015 was selected from a pool of over 21 fouls and 500 applicants, representing coming from 45 seats in the u.s. and from 40 countries around the world. these young people and their families may not all know the statistics. for example about the long-term economic benefits to recall the education. but i think they are clearly making a very rational decision. many of them will finish in four years in fact most of them will come and according to the records, we know that within about six months after graduation, to surge of them will have jobs, more than 20% will be in graduate school and the rest will likely be in the military in some kind of a volunteer service such as the peace corps or other socially and economically useful activities. and while they are here, a very

large percentage will be engaged in some kind of internship and about half will spend at least a semester studying and living abroad. it is a remarkable experiment. it has been under way for several hundred years, and that brings me to the context or to the question of why are we here today? and that is because with this great experiment, there is a cacophony of opinions and a cacophony of expertise. and we know, and we are very grateful to be able to have the results of this ongoing and remarkable survey of the gal luft and pdk have been involved in. as to bring some coherence to bring some data to bear on this great cacophony of opinion and

expertise what better place to do that than in the university that is partly why i am so honored to have the chance to host this event because in many ways the introduction of the data about something that we hold dear, the future of american education is exactly one of the functions of a great university. so it is very much a pleasure to welcome you here on behalf of all of my colleagues in the graduate school of education and human development and across the george washington university family. i'm very much looking forward to hearing some of the details from the survey as i know you all are as well. i'm very happy to turn this back now to shane wolfe lopez. [applause] >> thank you dean feuer. he reminded me of a wonderful day in my first day of college when i first started a career in

the aforementioned student loans. we are going to throw a lot of information that you come in and i want to help you get more of that to stick. each one of us comes with our own issue as it relates to the education. and i do appreciate that. so, i can listen for every time that bill talks about the hope of american students, the wellbeing across american campuses. but what i'm trying to do today and i encourage you to do or think about those issues that bridge the case for 12 and a higher education. those commonalities, the points of discussion that maybe we don't have across k-12 and higher education. also, i'd like you to think about where the public will twice today in terms of how we can reform education, gender education, improved education, and then finally i want you to think about what role does the public policy plea on acting on the public will to make a better k through 20 system. on that note i want to turn things over to my good friend

and colleague over at pdk, the executive stricter at pdk, and she will talk about this year's pdk results. [applause] >> great job framing the issue is today. americans expect quality in the food we eat, the clothes we dhaka, the cars we drive. savitt is not surprising that there is an increasing demand for quality in our public schools. and in this conversation about quality it's starting to focus on more than just the schools. it's starting to focus on the teachers. among other things, this year's pdk results show that americans recognize the need for high-quality teachers in order to have high quality schools. there's a lot more to the story but first i want to tell you a little bit of background about pdk and the poll that we are

doing for the 43rd year. phi delta -- fadel tuck papah is a and educators that includes teachers, principals and superintendents and professor and it is this variety of education professionals that makes us unique. through our highly regarded magazine we serve as a trusted voice and advocate for public policies that support improved teaching and increased student learning. so this is the 43rd year pdk has partnered with gallant to conduct a poll of american attitudes towards the public schools. it's a national poll of approximately 1,000 americans aged 18 and older. a complete copy of this year's report is available for free at our web site, and if you just search on -- pdkpoll.org for

those of you within all i can you can go to the outdoor life store and download a free copy of the poll, and if you have downloaded one goldberg's you can do that, too. there are several things that distinguish this poll from many of the public opinion polls. first, the topics are identified by a bipartisan advisory panel that can be each year. second, the report is comprehensive. we provide data responses to every question that we ask and the copy of the question just as it was asked to read this allows readers to carefully judge the responses as it relates to the wording is a question. and third and final, finally, because we conduct a poll annually, we can closely monitor changes in the public opinions about their schools. almost half of the questions that we asked this year were asked previously, giving us a glimpse of how american

attitudes towards public schools has changed or not change from year to year. let me revisit the issue of teachers' quality. americans recognize that good teachers are the fastest route to education reform. the understand that in order to have quality schools, we need to have quality teachers. they believe we need to recruit and retain the best teachers we can and to remove ineffective teachers. this year's poll, 74%, three out of four americans, said that they would encourage the brightest person they know to become a teacher. 67% believe that we should recruit higher achieving high school students to become teachers, and two-thirds of americans say they would want a child of theirs to take up teaching as a career. americans also believe that

encouraging high school and college students with skills and science and math should become science and math teachers and that is just as important as encouraging them to become scientists. so it's clear that americans recognize the importance of getting quality students to become the next generation of great teachers. though americans expressed support for actively recruiting high-quality teachers for the future, they also feel pretty good about the teachers who are in the classroom today and in fact 71% of americans have trust and confidence in our current public-school teachers. changing topics, each year the pdk gallup poll asks americans to grade their schools much like we asked teachers to greater students. this year 51% of americans gave

the schools in their community a letter grade of either a or b and that has been relatively unchanged for a number of years. that is the middle line that you're looking at on the graph on the blue line. i want to concentrate on the other half lines for a minute. when we ask parents to grade the schools of their oldest child attends, 79% gave that school either an a or b, and as you can see, that is the highest grade ever signed by parents in the u.s. since we started this poll, and that is the red line at the top and 70% of americans gave letter grades of a or b to the nation's schools as a whole should fix economy. that's the bottom line. you can see how it's trended. we continue to be surprised by

the declining grades the americans gave the nation's schools as opposed to the improving grades the parents give to the school that their oldest child attends. on the one hand, the highest grades we have witnessed and on the other hand, they are the lowest that we've witnessed. now i suppose it made sense to some degree when you think that parents know teachers and their local schools, they are their neighbors, their friends, people that they run into the grocery store and in their community. so it's easier for them to know more about the schools in the local community. when it comes to the nation's schools as a whole, people are much less familiar with the issues. they rely upon what they hear or read in the news. and as we know, much of the news has been driven by the no child left behind legislation passed by congress almost ten years ago. and in fact, in this year's

poll, 68% of americans said that they are more likely to hear bad stories about teachers than good stories. we also asked americans to assignment letter grades to teachers come to principals and other administrators, to school board members and parents, and also to president obama. in comparison with of the last time we asked the question, and that was in 1984, teachers and principals grades have increased significantly. those are the two sets of parts on the left side of the graphic. at the same time, the great designed for parents and school board members has remained relatively unchanged. the great after declining last year in approved this year with 41% of the respondents assigning

him either an a or b for his performance in support of public schools. but of course the duraid assigned to the president offered related directly to the political affiliation of our survey respondents. and i know that's a shocking discovery for all of you. [laughter] this year after the highly publicized debate over collective bargaining in states like wisconsin and ohio, we decided to include a couple of questions on the topic. using a question that we had asked previously, we back in 1976, we got to get a snapshot of public opinion today as compared to opinion 35 years ago. and this is where the story gets complicated. 47% of americans believe that teachers unionization hurts the quality of public schools with only 26% believing that it's

helped. on the other hand, and the recent disputes between the governors and the teachers' unions over collective bargaining legislation, 52% of americans side with the teachers' union leaders as opposed to 41% who side with the governors. and there's lots of different ways to interpret these results. it could be that americans believe were preceded that the teachers' unions are protecting bad teachers and as we have seen over and over in the questions that we ask, americans are looking for high-quality among their teachers. i think the teachers union leaders of the national level recognize this and are aggressively addressing that perception with lots of initiatives focusing on the quality of the teachers' work force, and the question as locally and the state level what kind of activities with the teachers' union leaders also take.

at the same time, americans have consistently felt that teachers are underpaid. so it could be that they worry that legislation restricting the collective bargaining could result in the lower salaries for teachers. moly would that be tough for the current teachers work force, it would also make it more difficult to attract bright and dedicated people in the teaching a course in the future. we continue to monitor americans' opinions about public school choice, public charter schools and school vouchers. 70% of americans favor the idea of public charter schools. and that is up from 42% approval rating when you first asked the question in the year 2000. that is a significant change in opinion over just the course of one decade. yet when we ask about the school vouchers this year, 65% of

americans opposed allowing students and parents to attend students to attend private schools at the public's expense and that is the highest opposition registered in the last ten years. so before we shift to the next portion of the program i want to thank our partners at gal luft, the dean of the gallup university and james lopez who is the co-director of coal with me and also want to thank the members of our advisory panel that met last february, and if you get a copy of the report you will see their names listed there and finally i would like to thank john richardson who's the editor-in-chief and her staff for their editorial --