sir, this week the house of representatives is considering several cybersecurity proposals but this morning i want to talk with you about the cybersecurity proposals that are here in the senate because while there has been a lot of talk about privacy and civil liberties, implications of the house proposals and rightly so, fewer people talking about the two bills here in the senate. the fact is as they are currently drafted, both of the cybersecurity proposals in the senate present very serious threats to our privacy and civil

liberties. both bills allow companies the near unfettered ability to monitor the e-mails and files of their customers. both of those companies to share that information directly with the military. both bills allow the federal government to freely share that information with law-enforcement and both bills immunize companies against grossly negligent and knowing violations of the privacy protections that apply to this process. in doing all of this, decades of privacy laws, many wrote in many cases with chairman leahy at the helm. talking about the wiretap act and historic communications act

and the pen register, i have been working with senator durbin with the sponsors of cybersecurity in 2012 working with us. we hope we can fix these problems, but it is important that everyone know we have real civil liberties problems. not just in the house and the senate but i am saying all of this to you because the administration's cybersecurity proposal from last may does not have many of these problems. in some ways more protective of our privacy than the senate. i want to use the remaining time i have here to tease out those differences and make the case we should pay attention to what the administration did in its

proposals. as i mentioned, the cybersecurity act and the secure ip act would allow military to be the initial recipient of any information being shared by a private company but it is my understanding is the official position of this administration that a civilian entity, not a military entity should always be the initial recipient of cybersecurity data from the private sector. can you explain why this is the administration's position? >> the administration's position mirrors how we have organized ourselves in the absence of cyberlegislation and the way we organize ourselves is dod has responsibility for military networks but dhs has responsibility for interception with the private sector. we both use technology resources of the nsa but we use them under

different authority and more restrictions particularly on the privacy side than you would in an international military context. the position we have is to make sure the statute mirrors what is happening on the ground. >> thank you. both of the bills in the senate give private companies the new authority to free monitor the communications and files on their systems, many of which would be private. these bills create a new sweeping authority despite existing provisions that allow companies to perform monitoring to protect their sins. the administration's proposal does not contain that broad authority. can you tell us why it does not?

>> we're looking at the protection of critical infrastructure, looking at the fact of the attack and the methodology used, code and signatures that were employed so we can check and see whether that is being done elsewhere and also mitigate and communicate with other companies about this type of attack so we are not looking at content. we're looking at how. >> thank you. why does the administration -- what me back up. the administration's proposal will lead a loss federal cybersecurity center to share the information with the private

company with law-enforcement authorities. of this constitutes evidence of a crime. in comparison one of the senate bill allows disclosure of information received by the federal government to law enforcement if it, quote, appears to relate to a crime. why does the administration had a heightened standard for disclosure to law enforcement to protect civil liberties? >> i don't know the reason for the difference in the language. what both of getting at is use of information for non law-enforcement purpose would not be immunized or permitted. i have to follow up with you on why the difference between the two. >> thank you. i want to thank you. i do want to say i agree with my

colleagues who say we need to do something about cybersecurity, a question about that. we need to get the legislation right. such that the bill does not unnecessarily sacrifice civil liberties and i thank you so much for your service and for being here and your answers. thank you. >> senator -- senator sessions. >> your meteoric rise to chairmanship exceeds even senator franken's. >> mine was actually -- [laughter] >> for the purposes of this hearing we have the secretary and i don't think we should squabble over that. >> we are glad to have both

senators here. madam chairman, homeland security, a big operation. the third largest personal operation and second in our government. >> third largest. >> 200,000 people. i was uneasy about that bill. as i recall democrat consolidated president bush and in the family said yes and passed it without a whole lot of consideration so you have a lot of agencies. you have the coast guard, secret service, all sorts of agencies with different histories, cultures so i know the challenge is hard. i truly believe -- i don't think it is completely together yet. do you agree there is cultural

and bureaucratic inefficiencies that could be obtained and focused on today? >> we operate under the caption 1 dhs and excavate differences and systems and cultures and protocols and procedures and a lot accomplished over the last nine years. my two predecessors over the past three years that i have been secretary. given the size and scope of the merger that is under way it does take time. the department of defense took by most accounts 40 years to become unified. my goal is to substantially beat that record. >> every dollar the taxpayers send us they need and have a right to expect it is viable east and. we have duplication,

mismanagement and competition in departments and agencies that needs to be confronted. on will throw that out. does suggest if you focus on that. senator kyl, i believe, raised the question of chicago and their refusal to honor prisoners which i find is cook county's policy is unacceptable. you have written letters about it. i hope you follow through on it. they are on track to obtain community money and programs through 2013 but alabama has been sued by the administration for trying to have laws that help america enforce its immigration laws. not block the enforcement of immigration laws, had its secure community money not continued for counties that have asked for

it. can you tell us where you stand on that? and when can alabama expect that they will be able to have their secure funding? >> as i shared with senator kyl, i believe the cook county ordinance is unwise. we are evaluating all options. we have been trying to work with the county to see if there is a resolution. with respect to alabama, given the litigation, what we did was simply stop the expansion of secure communities. we have covered 75% of the foreign-born population so is the final court but our plan is to complete implementation of secured communities nationwide by the end of 2013.

>> that would include alabama. that is a problem for me. i will follow some written questions to make sure we are clear where that is heading. it seems to me states targets -- there law was not popular with the department. with the president. whereas not taking any firm action against cook county which endangers the people of cook county and the country. with regard to these exit programs, this is a plan that was designed and required by law in 1996. i have observed it and seen it since i have been in the senate. difficulties have occurred.

we have a visa waiver plan marking the entry program. i do not believe it is that difficult to implement an exit program. i said that when the bush and ministration was in office and i will say it again. a report from the government accountability office validates that and i hope that we can make some progress on it. first, you indicated earlier that you had a biographical plan but fingerprints and dna, fingerprints being the most logical from my perspective, that a fingerprint or other biometric exit system is needed to have this system up and

working. otherwise somebody could walk out with a card with their name on it and their biographical data and no way to verify the person holding that card is the person actually exiting. >> let me offer to have our staff, enhanced by a graphic, it is not simply a hard but i will make sure you get briefed on that with the biometric. the issue is going to be whether the congress wants to appropriate the money for whatever margin is left after the enhanced by a graphic. our plan to use the enhanced by a graphic is a platform for that is in final clearance. we will share that with you as well. >> i had a long year or more.

and secretary ridge. i met with international stakeholders and it went on for months and months and months. your experience as federal and state prosecutors, the same experience. every police officer's file, the fingerprint of someone arrested in the united states and the fingerprint is the basic basis for identifying fugitives. when he left after refusing to commit, left one bit of advice, we should have a buy graphic system that should be the fingerprint. to his successors. i do believe that is the system that works. is there any plan not to have

that? >> the first stage is the enhanced by a graphic which we are a long way towards right now. and use that have a platform. >> it should have been the biometric -- we would have that done lot sooner than four years. basically saying we don't intend to take any efforts. that allows the country's, and a waiver to have an unfair, unlimited. >> we looked at these over

states and stacked them according to biographical information we have about -- turning that over to ice to prioritize it. the problem, the reason there's no biometrics system is it is not easy. the courts have always been designed for entry. the architecture has never been designed for exit. that cost manpower issues. >> maybe a briefing from your staff would be helpful to me. >> happy to provide that. >> thank you, senator sessions. senator blumenthal. >> thank you for your service

and your effective work on financial security and your words harrier. they do to use your word marvelous job. i want to follow upon a line of questioning senator graham began in terms of looking forward to the kinds of systems, analogizing the secret service to the military that are used in that context. and additional steps taken to safeguard against and monitor the kinds of abuses that obviously occurred or allegedly occurred. >> we are in tents on doing a thorough examination. how to do it now and what we need to do to improve to make sure this never happens again. all those kinds of options are

on the table. >> switching to a different subject, i was recently approached by same-sex couple. one was a citizen of the united states and the other is not. i wrote to you and i want to thank you for your assistance in connection with their application for a greeting card to be held in a band. you're probably aware of the problems that arrived in these circumstances. eventually we need a solution like the uniting families in america act that can provide some longer-term solution to this problem.

i wonder whether we can establish policy of not supporting or in other words holding greeting cards for same-sex couples, one of whom is here and the other seeking a green card. >> the end of vice we have been given is unless the law is overturned cannot give green cards based on that. we have same-sex couples, that fall within the other criteria -- intercede with removal of

other actions. >> strong supporter of other members of this committee repealing doma, which would provide a comprehensive solution. i have been approached by other similar couples who have the enormous contributions to make to this country and whose families are every bit deserving of the kind of recognition we afford to heterosexual couples so i hope i can work with you on this area to advise solutions in the meantime that will enable those couples to continue to the families here as we need and they deserve. >> absolutely. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i have been trying to juggle schedules and you have been very patient. thank you for your service. i would like to ask a few

questions about the dream act which we talked about from time to time. senator schumer and i held a hearing on the controversial arizona law and talked about seven arizona residents who qualify for the dream act but also would be the targets of arizona law. beyond reasonable suspicion that they are documented and stated publicly they are either attending college or graduate of arizona state university with degrees in engineering as an example. you were asked by a bipartisan group of senators to suspend deportation of dream act students and response you and the president established a new deportation policy. under this policy as i understand it is a high priority for those who committed serious crimes or threatened the public. it is a low priority to deport individuals who have been in the united states since childhood like those ineligible for the dream act.

last night we receded updated statistics i requested a review of deportations that dhs is conducting. currently more than 300,000 pending deportation cases. of these ice as receive 2,354. sixteen thousand five forty-four cases, seven.5% have been identified as eligible for the minister of closure. of these cases, 2,722 or 1.2% have been closed. please explain the difference between the 7.5% of deportation cases eligible to be closed and the 1.2% of cases actually close. windier expect the percentage of cases closed to rise or do you expect it to rise and windy expected to be complete? >> the difference is attributable to time. we have been doing this case by case review.

we just started the pilot right after christmas and removed to go across the country since then. that is part of it. and part of it is -- we will be close to the case reviewed by the end of the calendar year and we will see what the numbers show. >> another conversation about compensation. this to me is basic issue which we should discuss this year. historically by interpretation of the department and previous president george w. bush, in cases where there was deferred action these individuals were allowed to work given work authorization. now under the new policy these individuals are offered administrative closure. your department has taken the

position individuals whose cases are administratively clothes cannot apply for work authorization. qualified individuals are not deported but can't work to support themselves and their families. many will end up in the underground economy which puts them at risk of exploitation and other cuts in the labour market. only a few thousand people had their deportation halted so far. i can imagine this will have significant impact on employment in america. i asked you why we are not at least making certain that if we have deferred action or administrative closure that the person is allowed to work? >> just to make sure the common understanding of the record we have continued to do that before cases getting to the administrative system. the administrative closure are cases that are already on the

docket, most of which are on the not obtained bucket but a number on the detained docket and those are the ones we're going through in addition to evaluating new cases that come in to see that they meet the priorities we have set so with respect to the work authorization, we are going back in light of your concerns and the fact the we have some numbers to look at as opposed to when we started this process to see if we should make some adjustments so i would be willing to keep you apprised of our efforts in that regard. i thought about your concerns after we spoke and i thought they were serious concerns and we are exploring how best to look at them. >> we both know the president is committed to the dream act. he was co-sponsor in the senate

and made some important decisions to help these dream act students. i hope we can find a way to go further when comes to giving them an opportunity to work. i ask about special registration program created after 9/11. arab-americans and american muslims and south asian americans faced national origin and religious profiling. at least that was what was suggested that a recent hearing i held two weeks ago. special registration program targeted arab and moslem visitors for them to face deportation. are called the program to be terminated because there were doubts it would help combat terrorism. if we heard testimony that terrorism experts concluded special registration wasted homeland security resources and it ended up alienating arab-americans and some muslims. 80,000 people registered. thirteen thousand facing deportation. how many terrorists were identified by special registration?

none. last year dhs turned special registration requirements. because of special registration many innocent arabs and muslims face deportation or citizenship. we issued a memo to address the situation with these individuals providing individuals who failed to apply that they wouldn't be penalized if not compliant, or intention or reasonably excusable. will you ensure the status for noncompliance with the short registration are going to be applied fairly and generously? >> yes i will and i will make sure that ice for reports how that is being implemented. >> i've visited an immigration detention facility in d-backs southern illinois. and i applaud ice for issuing its revised standards. in the process of looking those over. we are concerned about the

conditions. some of them will take a deep investigation before we can say with certainty that there are violations but there was something basic that caught my attention. lack of access to the telephone. there are 300 miles from family. it may seem like a small issue but the immigration detainees, it is not. currently these emigration detainee's don't have the right to an appointed attorney. approximately 80% go forward without one. basically none of them have access to e-mail unlike federal prisons and many are in remote facilities such as the one i visited. they repeatedly raised the concern about their inability to communicate with the outside world. they said they couldn't afford the phone calls that cost $1 or $2 a minute. they're being charged. these are not wealthy people.

they are very poor. we tried to use the local phones to see how they would work and they didn't. so there was spotty service and high costs. .. >> i was reminded in your opening testimony just that challenging your job is by the fact that you casually reference

you the daily threat where you supervise the third largest federal agency of the scope of responsibility that i think it's awesome. and the challenge that you and your team face in striking an appropriate balance between security, commerce, is a very difficult delicate balance and i want to start by thanking you for your service. i have no use ensure attorney general and have always been impressed with your record. first, on the secret service scandal, if i might. there's been some suggestion in the press today i think in the "washington post" that this is part of a long-standing pattern of practice. in my previous role i had the honor of supervising a local law enforcement agency, and in a devastating to morale and even two operations such incidents can be. this particular incident is very troubling and i know that there is an aggressive far-reaching investigation under way. but have you been allegations of comparably serious misconduct related to the office of

professional responsibility in the past? and what steps specifically have you directed secret service director sullivan to take to ensure that this particular type of misconduct doesn't occur again? >> no to my knowledge, there have been no similar type incidents reported to the office of professional responsibility. i cannot speak to the inspector general, that's a separate department, but not passive opr. what the director is doing is really revealing -- training, supervision, going back, talking to other agents, really trying to ferret out whether this is a systemic problem. if it is that would be a surprise to me. i must say of someone who has been the service secretary for three and half years now, i have found the men and women i work with to be extremely professional.

and the men and women i come into contact with to be extremely professional. but we want to make sure that we get to the bottom of this, that we deal strongly with those who committed the misconduct and gave the report. that's already been done, quite a lot of speed. and that we ferret out any of the problems. because the men and women of the secret service don't serve have their reputations besmirched. >> i want to commend you for us with these investigations proceed. i just wanted to reassert what i think we share, which is a conviction that it needs to be done, not just this incident but a far-reaching investigation that can reassure the american public that this is not somehow an agency with this is routinely tolerate or private practice. this is truly an outlier incident. i also just want to thank you. the last time you were before i asked a question about customs and border patrol and interdiction of counterfeit or legend counterfeit materials.

you just implemented a new administration policy that allows the agents when they seize goods at the border that are believed to be possibly counterfeit, to share that information with the rights holders but i think that's a good and strong advance. i had introduced legislation, but given us with the legislation is moving here, i'm glad the administration has embraced the change in practice and policy. i want to dedicate most of our time to cybersecurity. i share senator franken's deep concerns about privacy and how we strike and appropriate balance, but also senator whitehouse is concerned that if we fail to effectively legislate in the field, we leave our critical national infrastructure gravely vulnerable at risk. i note that in your fy '13 budget, cybersecurity gets nearly 75% increase in funding while the rest of the department overall stays flat so i just want to commend. i think you are, in fact, prioritizing delivering appropriate resources. first, if i could, we talked

about partnerships, fusion centers, us-cert is an impressive dhs cyber resource, and i wondered how you see state and local resources in the law-enforcement community, the national guard, as we discussed before, delaware and rhode island have squadrons in the national guard that i think can and should play a positive role here. what sort of resource constraints do we have in terms of effectively responding to launch force in community and the first responder community? i concerned by the cyberthreat is that it will be merged, a, it is very broad and a very cities threat today. but second, a critical infrastructure threat will emerge very quickly and require very rapid response. >> i think a couple of things, senator. i think obviously i share your concern. working with the state and locals who were on the floor of the nccic, but it's helping with

training, it's providing lots of information. i think we provided 5000 bulletins last year. cert responded to 106,000 incident itself, and so, training, information sharing, and then across the country in certain locations have centers of excellence, which are helping us refine what we are doing, but also think ahead, you know, what's the next and going to happen in the cyberworld. >> i also am familiar with the program which is have some challenges. i think it has been successful in promoting site safety at those sites that deal with dangerous chemicals that really has significantly underperformed, particularly in cybersecurity, and just wanted to encourage attention on a particular area that was brought up my previous question by senator grassley.

giving the evolving cyber attack risk to our nation's infrastructure and given the debate, provisions, please if you would explain force the particular strengths that dhs has regarding its capability and capacity to administer potential regulations and protect our infrastructure. are you confident that dhs has the capacity as opposed to nsa or d.o.t. required to have this critical national threat? >> yes, and, in fact, as you know, the budget increases has been requested. we've had level additions in the cyber area over the last three years. we already are the department that deals primarily with the private sector and with critical infrastructure, and those mechanisms with which to do that are already in place. and so, on the civilian side and

on the dot com side as it were, dhs already has that systemic protection role. i think general alexander testified to that several times. beauty of course as to the dot mil environment. so the resources are there. the experience is there meaning at -- those lessons have been learned. those lessons learned give us greater confidence that we can administer this probably. >> last, if i could. some concerns about privacy and then about bringing the public into this conversation. i think it was senator lee briefly asked about screening technology and its development, something i would be happy to get a briefing on about its trajectory. recognizing that a lot of what's going on in the dialogue between the administration and congress about the cyberthreat is

occurring in secure briefings, and that a lot of the information, at least i and many other senators have received that makes it clear to us just a big a threat this is, just how much loss there is here of intellectual property and how much potential risk there is. most of the critical information is shared with us in a secure setting. my concern is that this committee previously legislate on intellectual property through the attacked ip act and comparable committee and house, legislative some would argue overreached in the stop online piracy act. and there was a very broad and unexpectedly strong national response to them by engaged and motivated citizens who were deeply concerned with some legitimacy that there was some real threat to their privacy and to the -- of the internet. my concern here is that if we are not sufficient bring the public along in strike an appropriate balance here between

privacy, security and commerce, we may face a comparable, unexpected national backlash against these legislative efforts. given how rarely we legislate on issues this critical, i'm deeply concerned we not includes a moment, that we not create a moment of real vulnerability when you have worked so hard to craft, to structure your work. senator franken as previously about how the administration in this proposals may have been a stronger job of recognizing validated privacy concerns. any advice for me about how we can, while recognizing the limitations of information that must be held secure, more effectively, engage the public in this dialogue and the balance between security and liberty? >> well, we have tried to do by sharing information with the public through a variety of means. i think it's significant that when the have been briefings in a classified setting, you had sitting there the head of the joint chiefs, the head of the nsa, the head of the fbi, the

second in charge of the dni, the second in charge of the doj, and myself, all saying the same thing, it's a big risk, it's honest. we need some way to protect the nation's core critical infrastructure. we need some way to have information sharing. we need to update and streamline some of the statutes that exist now. in terms of privacy, i think that was built into particularly the column -- the bipartisan bill in this chamber, providing for privacy, for independent privacy oversight, limitations on how information can be used and the like. i think we just need to continue to emphasize the differences between that and some of the other approaches. >> i agree with you. though secure briefings have been successful. they have been in my case a racing, at times alarming. but the unified and broad engagement by this

administration in ensuring the sin is briefed is commendable. i just am concerned that when i go and talk in my home state of delaware i don't hear the same level of broadly shared understanding of just how real, just a confident, just tell present a threat to this is to our property, to critical infrastructure, and to the vibrancy of our nation. let me just, last question, would be immigration. i was struck, there is a recent pew report the cannot i believe saint for the first time in 30 years there a more illegal immigrants returning to mexico from the united states than coming here. and i think that is in part due to strengthening in the economy there but it's also i think the unprecedented action of this administration to hire more border guards, more a document workers than ever before and really bear down and engage strong, smart and effective border security, and enforcement. i wondered if you at any comment on that? >> i do.

and, in fact, i look at the pew study yesterday, and it does, you become what its talk about our long-term migration trends, and what it identifies is exactly what you said, that the trend now is more outmigration in mexico than in migration. and it attributes a lease part of that to the record amount of personal and technology, infrastructure, put on the border. in part because it was bipartisan agreement by the congress to appropriate an additional $600 million to let them do that job. our efforts now are sustaining that and making sure we stay ahead of any search or movement and illegal traffic along the border, and keep the board as safe and as secure as we can spit i think you've done a commendable job on this. i think it's important the general public realized my side of the aisle which is sometimes mischaracterize not being sufficiently vigorous in our support of enforcement, shows that, this is a bipartisan

effort to i think you'll make real progress in the enhanced biographic exit program, and there was some real dialogue about that but if you think i'm cautiously optimistic we will find a new common ground on a host of immigration issues, the d.r.e.a.m. act, h-1b reform, stem immigration or united families. last just a question on fema response. i think retaining airlift capacity in local national guard and state national guards was critical in the state of vermont, represented by the real chairman of this committee, as well as my state in the past where hurricanes are flooding or other issues. i wondered if he had any comment about how the president's funding request might affect the ability to state national guards to play an active supportive role in disaster response? >> senator, let me get back to you on that, because, are you asking about how our request

with respect to reforming the grants over all would affect first responders? are you asking specific to the national guard? >> i think this is more a national guard capacity within the branch issue. so i may have asked the question that is not directly in your -- >> i think there's probably more appropriate address to the department of defense, but i will say our entire work with fema has been to be a team with local and state responders as opposed to the feds being not in charge. and i think that teamwork approach has been well received. it has worked very effectively. >> i would agree. i hear all the time from our first responder community, delaware, how grateful they have been for the sheer training, equipment, the grants programs actually help one of our local volunteer fire companies write their annual grant and a memorable all nighter. and i just want to close by thanking you for your strong leadership in the department and

for the department sustained significant contribution to the security and liberty to the people of the united states. thank you very much for your testimony, madam secretary. we will be the record open for members who want to submit additional questions. this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations]

>> weathers the national public radio table. [cheers and applause] >> you guys are still here. [laughter] that's good. i could a member where we landed on that. [laughter] [applause] >> this weekend, the 90th annual white house correspondents dinner. president obama and late-night talk show host jimmy, headlined the event before an audience of celebrities, journalists and the white house press corps. coverage starts with a red carpet arrivals live at

6:30 p.m. come and watch the entire dinner only on c-span. you can sync up your experience online at c-span's dinner hub. find a celebrity guest list, highlights of past dinners, plus blog and social media post at c-span.org/w. h. a cd, the white house correspondents dinner live saturday at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. on monday and run it comes like a republican presidential candidate mitt romney was the keynote speaker at the connecticut republican parties annual prescott bush awards fundraising to the event took place at the marriott hotel in stamford, connecticut. state republicans held their primary on tuesday along with four other states or to remarks about 20 minutes. >> thank you. we haven't won yet.

i said we haven't won yet, but we're going to so that's okay. thank you for that wonderful introduction. and it is great to be here, and i will tell you before you even begin that i have feelings about how difficult this is to run and to do this, and my heart goes out to all of those families who put their hearts and soul, believed in their spouse, and yet didn't cross the finish line, and i know what it's like because i've been there and how it felt four years ago, and i will tell you the sentiments i had four years ago was i know one thing for certain, i'm never going to do that again. [laughter] now, mitt laughs. he said you know what, ann, you

said that after every pregnancy. [laughter] and we know how that works out. i have five sons. that is the feeling you have come because it's such an emotionally draining thing that you go through, and the person that you're fighting for, that you love, that you cherish, you know that they are being maligned at times to know they're being misrepresented at times, and you know that they're not getting the proper treatment at times. and yet here we go again. and so what made the difference from this time about how easy it was for me to know to step forward? it was a little over a year ago, it was in january, a year and a half ago now, that our family all met together at christmas, and the four years previous i had my five daughters along with my five sons and a bunch of grandeur. we don't listen to what they say even though they have an opinion, we all decided it was a

good idea for mitt to go forward, and fast-forward four years later, we had the same meeting. and the opinions were very different. as a matter fact it was only one son that felt strongly the mitt should go forward, and there was only me that felt he should go forward. and it was quite a different meeting. and the kids all suffer every moment of every day with every difficult thing that we go through as well. and sometimes will notice when we are parents and watch our kids struggling, or even in a sporting match or something else that sometimes we suffer more than the person that is actually in the fight. and so it was very hard for my children to go through this again. and yet here we all are and we decided to do it again. i felt so strongly about it, because i believe in mitt.

and this was the question i asked him, because we were trying, and the kids and the boys were all trying to figure out the playing field, like who is going to be running, and you know, what stakes could we've when and how hard would this be and you try to like game at epic and after a while i just said, you know something? i don't care about any of that. that isn't, that is a what i'm going to make my decision on. because you never know the things they're going to come your way, and you never know how the playing field can change. i said i only want to know one thing. and that is, mitt, if you get the nomination, which isn't easy, and number two, if you beat barack obama, which isn't going to be easy either, can you fix it? i need to know, is it too late? has america gone over the proverbial cliff? and we don't have time to turn things around.

i need to know whether it's worth it to go through all of this and to have you get there and if you're going to tell me i'm sorry, it's too late, and he said no, it is getting late but it's not too late. [applause] and with that i said if that's all i need to know. i don't want it any other question answered for me, because if you can fix it, you must do this. [applause] and i think that's what brings all of you here tonight, and why, having gone through, 42, 43 states, i've lost track, a family states trendy and i have campaigned in. there is something going on out there. there is something so palatable

you can feel it where people are ready for a change, and they are ready for someone to come in and fix it. [applause] and i, i so believe in my husband because i have seen him in so many different situations. we met as kids. we fell in love in high school. we have been married for 43 years. we have five wonderful sons, and five amazing daughters in law. thank goodness within. my life would not be -- honey, i think my sons every day, how great i love my daughters in law. and 16 fabulous grandkids. so we are busy. and i care very much about the future of my grandchildren. and i will say that at all these events we go to, there's some, obviously every day is a bit

different generators a lot of people mitt -- people seem to sort swarm around mitt. i can go up the side and i go and talk to people, and find out, and often ask, especially women, why are you here? what made you come out of your house today? to this event. and what do you think about the future? and there's a couple of very interesting things that come out of those conversations. number one i would have which is the kind of sweetest of all is that so many women that i've never met before, and may never see ever again in my life tell me how much they care for me and how much they are praying for me. and i so appreciate that. [applause] and i can tell you how much i appreciate that, because the days are long. the road is hard.

the trials are there, and i never know when i have this little gray cloud that is over my head when it will start raining on me again. and i do need everyone's prayers, but i also believe that we're here for a purpose and that mitt has been prepared and that he is done things in his life that will serve him so well for the next huge job that he has. and i, i will tell you just a few of those things. one is he's been an extraordinary husband. he has been by my side in good days and in bad days, in my darkest hour he stood by my side with my diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. he also stood by my side when i was diagnosed with breast cancer. and i had to have that. i had to have him believing in me and trusting that i could do the right things and pull

through this. there were days when i didn't think i could. and there were days when i thought my only future was going to be in bed and two weeks of any kind of a normal life. and yet he kept encouraging me and kept letting me and telling me that none of those things that i actually did physically to take care of the house and the children and the bills and all the things which some people think that i didn't work, you know, those were things i was very busy doing. [applause] and you know, as a woman you actually end up having done those things for so many years, taking care of the children, doing the laundry, doing the grocery shopping, doing the cooking them all of those things, which i did by the way, i didn't have help for many, many years. as a matter fact i didn't have any help at all until the fifth

baby was born and i had an emergency surgery when his four months old, and i was in bed and realized that i couldn't take care of five small boys with mitt working so hard and i need a little extra. so i know what it's like to finish the laundry and look in the basket five minutes later and it's full again. i know what it's like to go all the groceries in, and see the teenagers run through and then all of a sudden all the groceries you just bought a few hours ago were gone. and i know what it's like to get up early in the morning and to get them off to school, and i know what it's like to get up in the middle of the night when they are sick. and i know what it's like to struggle and to have those concerned that all mothers have. so, we are grateful for the response that we got from that, and appreciative of the recognizing that women have choices in life, and some choices are not all the same, but that we value everyone's choice we make in their professions.

[applause] and my hat is off to the men in this room, too, that are raising kids but i'd love that, at about the fact that there are also women out there who don't have the choice and they must go to work and they still have to raise kids. thank goodness that we value those people, too. and sometimes life isn't easy for any of us. but getting back to how mitt treated me, and i will tell you again, as making a choice that he did, which was to stay home and be a mother, that he would remind me all the time that my job was more important than his, that his job was temporary, that mine was going to bring forever happiness. and he believed it. he just didn't say. hee bee gee bee. so he valued me. he treated me as an equal partner, and we are equal partners today in everything we do. we care for each other. we love each other, and we are there for each other.

so that's why i am willing to go out and do these crazy things. it doesn't come naturally, i'm sure, but it's also something that i'm actually quite enjoy. it's been amazing to go across this country and to see what people are talking about, and to see how much people love america and how they value it. but i'm going to get back to other things that i've seen mitt do. i have seen him in work do things that are actually quite extraordinary. he was obvious he a father to those five boys. now, my husband, but he also served in our church, and he did things that were so extraordinary, how to counsel people when he was tired. people would be coming into the house late at night, needing help and needing some encouragement. i never knew why they came. off and i didn't even know who they were.

they would come in the side door, as if they didn't want anyone to share that they're going through difficult times. never wants to mitt ever tell me one thing about the things he was helping those people with. he kept it in such strict confidence, and they had his complete trust. so that's the other thing i saw him do, is being a caring person for others that were going through difficult times. i also saw him at the same time he was raising his family and taking on those other responsibilities being so successful in business. and you all know it's not easy to succeed like a mitt has succeeded. but i saw him do it and i saw him do it again and again. and he did it so well that they asked him to come and rescue the salt lake winter games. that was another adventure and it turned out pretty well. and it turned out to be a huge

blessing in my life, too, because it was at the same time that i was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. and it seemed like he was the craziest thing in the world to do, but it was one of those moments where, in my heart, i knew it was the right thing to do, even though it was going to be hard, it was going to be hard for me, and it turned out to be one of the greatest blessings in our lives. we loved every minute of it. we had the greatest time that i made the best of friends out there, and i learned how to start putting my disease in remission during that time it and it ended up being a great, great experience for me. i will just tell you a tiny little anecdote, which is when i was going out there, i was having difficulty walking. and i was losing my balance and i was really worried about, you know, whether i would be in a wheelchair. during that time i learned how to take care of my health better, here my disease went

into remission but i slowly started rebuilding my strength. i was doing some alternative therapies that help me as well. and then by the end of the three years, i could barely walk when i went out, and mitt and denounce to me chose me to be his hero and to run the torch in salt lake city. and what a moment that was with my children surrounding me. my husband, with tears rolling down their faces, because they knew what a long journey i've been on for me to be able to run with the torch. and what a joyful moment it was for our family, to meet to build up my husband passed that torch -- [applause] you never know kind of soft landing you get by people who love you and care for you and make your life more, just more

wonderful for having to struggle as you're going through. so that was another interesting chapter in our life, and i saw mitt be so successful, and dennis i'm coming and do that in massachusetts. i saw him as governor. he went into a state that was $3 billion in the hole. and in four years time, he left $2 billion in the rainy day fund, and this is the great part. he did it without raising taxes and without borrowing any more money. [applause] so i will tell you, by the way, what i hear from those women that talk to me on the side of the rope lines and what they're talking about. and this is why, by the way, we're going to win the election. [applause] what they are talking about is the economy.

what they are talking about is their husbands jobs, their jobs, their children's job. they are talking about, believe it or not, budget deficits. they are word. all of them feel as though we are at a turning point, and that if we don't act now it's going to be too late. and that's again why all of you are in this room again tonight because you all believe that as well. we are at a critical point in our history, and i have all the confidence in the world that mitt romney, who has the skills, the experience, the compassion, the wonderful nature of having to have the good judgment and everything else that you need to be a good president, to be able to do what is going to be necessary to turn this country around, and to bring some stability to the future. so with that, i am going to tell all of you something tonight, and that is, we are going to win

in november. [applause] so god bless you all for coming here tonight, for helping us make that happen. because this is going to be part of the connecticut -- guess what, you're going to have to fight, too. want a fight it's going to be in this state. i know you believe that even in this state with a kind of message, with economic message, with women that a caring about the economy, with all this caring about deficits, that we can win. and so i bless you all, and god bless america.

thank you so much. [applause] on behalf of the connecticut republican party, a small gift of our appreciation to ann romney. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> i have seen to earn a certain place where people will listen to me, and i've always cared about the country. and the greatest generation writing that book gave me a kind

of a platform that was completely unanticipated. so i thought i ought not to squander that. so i ought to step up as not just as a citizen and as a journalist but as a father and a husband and a grandfather, and if i see these things i ought to write about them and tried to start this dialogue, which i was time to do with his book about what we need to get to next. >> in his latest, the time of our lives, tom brokaw urges americans to redefined the american dream. your questions for the former anchor and managing editor of "nbc nightly news" in his half-dozen books is written about the greatest generation, the 1960s, and today. in depth sunday may 6 live at noon eastern on c-span2's tv. >> mexican president felipe calderón spoke tuesday about mexico's economic

competitiveness at the u.s.-mexico leadership and initiative business summit held that the u.s. chamber of commerce. the business summit brings together government and business officials to discuss ways to strengthen the economic alliance between the two countries. the u.s. is mexico's leading trade partner and mexico is the second largest u.s. export market. his remarks are just under an hour. >> good morning welcome i haven't heard a welcome like that for a head of state here in a long time, indiscriminate appropriate. it's wonderful to see also, see all of you for such a timely conversation on the united states and mexico and are critically important economic partnership. there are a number of people here today who need to be recognized, and let me mention them very briefly. mexico's minister for foreign of affairs, and mexico's minister

of the economy. and mexico's minister of finance, and the director general pro-mexico, carlos guzman. and, of course, our two esteemed ambassadors. and i'm going to introduce them separately, and i'm going off this group is the first of course is tony wayne, representing the united states in mexico city. and we are very pleased to have him. he is working hard and it is working very well but i'd like to purchase lopid of emphasis on my friend, october oh serve, who represents mexico here in the united states. and mr. president, just a little while ago at our breakfast, we celebrated many things that have worked out over time to expand both our economies. the ambassador has been a hard

worker, a good friend and occasionally a pain. because he would push us to get done what has to be done in a way that we finally do it just to quiet him down. [laughter] spent but we very much appreciate our partnership. it's been great for everybody. now, it's great to have all of you here -- [applause] so i'm glad you're all here today, and so me distinguished private sector guests from both of our countries. and i want to thank you all for taking the time and effort to join us. now, it is my pleasure to welcome back to the chamber a great friend of the united states, a great friend of business, and a great friend of challenging the problems we all face in this world, and he is here because of the strategic importance of the u.s. and mexican relationship. because 6 million u.s. jobs depend on trade with mexico,

because the united states is year in year out the largest source of foreign direct investment in mexico, because our countries share a land border of nearly 2000 miles, more than $1 billion in goods a day across the border and because our people share the same resources, read the same ad, drink the same water and share a common culture, and because our nations work together will be more competitive, create more jobs for our workers, and the more economically and physically secure in today's global environment. in history six years in office, he has demonstrated the strength of his convictions, confronted head on the country's security challenges, and worked with the united states as a critical ally

while urging the united states to do more to address some of the underlying causes of his nations challenges, particularly the drug trade, he has demanded and received the serious attention of world leaders. in june, he will host the g20 heads of state, and he has brought unprecedented energy and leadership to that effort at a critical time. at a time of exciting growth for the entire region, of latin america, he has worked to ensure that mexico is able to make most of every opportunity. he has augmented one of the world's most impressive free trade networks, giving mexico exported access to 44 markets worldwide. if our trade representatives are here, take note. we need some more ourselves. and he has enhanced the

commercial relationship with the united states, -- [inaudible] efforts to eliminate arbitrary, difference in investment strategy and he has streamlined and secured in many ways our shared border. and by advancing a vision of shared competitiveness and the trans-pacific partnership, in all of these efforts, he has enjoyed the friendship and the collaboration of the u.s. business community, and nowhere more so than right here at the u.s. chamber of commerce. so ladies and gentlemen, please give your warmest welcome to our very honored guest, the president of the united mexican states, felipe calderón. please join us at the podium. [applause]

thank you. thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. thank you, mr. donohue, for your comments and words. especially for your support to mexico, the council freedom, on trade that we share. thank you for all you have done in favor of our country. and congratulations for the centennial, the u.s. chamber. i think that the role of the chamber for the united states, and also for mexico, has been crucial, improving the conditions of the people. and thanks for your comments about our ambassador. indeed, we have a very good one.

with a lot of commitment. yes, he is a pain, and that is the reason we have here in washington, d.c. [laughter] well, let me start talking some lines about the mexican economy situation. under the circumstances of the global troubles we are looking, mexican economy i can say it is in good shape. we grew last year like 4%, our gdp. and we were able to create almost 600,000 new jobs in the form of sector net terms. which is quite important for mexican economy. public finances are in order. we have formal debt of 0.4%,

less half% back a gdp. and even if you include the total investment companies, out of the budget, in total deficit of mexico is below 2.5% of gdp. last week, our research rates $151 billion, which is more than the world total debt of the government of mexico. and that implies that we are able to -- debt isn't very good shape. for instance, we issue a couple years ago a special bond for a bond for 100 years, very affordable rate, and actually is the most successful operation at that term, in the world.

and today, we have very affordable public debt. our public debt is like 32% of gdp. you can see that the average of the other countries will be like 96%. mexico is in good shape as we'll. our inflation is low. would be like 3.5%, according to parameters of latin america countries is doing well, and despite the fact that the tremendous increase in food prices and commodity prices in the world. we are deepening our commitment to free trade. so that is more or less what i'm going to talk about today. into session. in particular, let me emphasize straight and competitiveness of mexico, which is very important for me, and most of that is coming from the very important

and crucial of nafta. that decision in 93 was crucial for the country. i want to express my gratitude for public sentiments that used to be there. one of them is here. and i think that they did very well. and we can see the positive consequences for mexico. let me start with this. the benefits of trade. and probably we are getting a lesson about it. trade is positive for the come and we need to say that to the media come and we need to say that to the congress. trade increased competitions. trade provide access to technologies for companies but also for society. trade increased productivity, productive efficiency and trade

tempers microeconomic stability. keep inflation under control, and in particular, the benefits of commerce are for all. consumers when. workers when. producers win. we all drank you with trade and we all drank a with congress. but in order to preserve the benefits of trade it's important it will make improvement in their achievements. actually, often economies provide the right incentives are company achievements in the nation's for government and for society. in order to preserve the competitiveness of the country we made several actions or are we took several decisions in order to do so. what kind of decisions we are making? for instance, we are, process of

trade, with even more agreements and treaty with other countries. we started a very special process of terrorist reductions in the country, even with countries with which we have non-free trade agreements. a process of the regulations in the government, the macroeconomic stability i talk already about it. investing a lot in infrastructure, and investment in education, in particular technology, technical education. starting with trade, you can see that mexico has preferential access to 44 countries. most of them through free trade agreements like nafta, but also we have free trade agreements with europe. we have free trade agreement with japan, and with several nations in latin america, all

central american countries, free trade agreement with chile, free trade agreements with peru, colombia, and others. seek and see the number of countries free trade agreements that mexico is very good position in that. as esther donahoe said, already sent. and on the right side of the line you can see the process we started with tears. let me take him it failed. since the first g20 meeting i attended here in washington, d.c., i removed with former president bush, and in any single meeting all the nations used to say, like final papers. don't allow protectionism. we refuse protections. we're going to conclude. and exactly the day after, 15

out of 20 participants in the g20 used to increase ties in their trade. with the exception of mexico. right in the middle of the crisis. even without understanding of several sectors of private, a society in mexico, we reduced targets. and actually we reduced from 11% on that production 2006, to 44% today, on average. and with that, mexico got a lot of competitiveness. why? because most of the trade today is not trade related. it's a mental problems trade passionate middle problems triggered and with that, the manufacture companies are getting a lot of competitiveness in our country. in other words, if you are able to get the cheapest inputs on

the highest quality inputs for your products, for instance, sorry, for these, for these blackberry, you are able to get the best inputs, you'll be able to produce 65% of the blackberry in the world in guadalajara city in mexico. and that is exactly the case. and the same is happening, reducing tariffs, increase exports for our country. and that is the mexican? why? because the key issue is middle. let me, other reform we are making is reducing bureaucracy and red tape. in 2010, we started a process, and in the process i ask all the

members of my cabinet to think about what exactly the regular framework that they really need to doing business. and we erase more than 16,000, from several conditions, and with that we eliminated more than 2200 procedures for industry. so it's probably the most important statutory process in mexican government. actually, we made some kind of contest, and the name of the contest was spanish, the most useless procedure, and a lot of

people participated we got a lot of suggestions to erase norms and regulatory frameworks. so we are increasing industry. one of these is we made is, for instance, to open a single webpage in order to start a business. before this, for instance, if you want to open a company in mexico, you need to go first to the foreign relations website in order to ask for a special permit. why? i don't know exactly, but you need to go first to the foreign relations ministry. and then you need to go to the, of course, to the tax office it and then you need to go to social security institute, and then you needed to go to the secretary of trade, commerce and so on. and with that, you used to have several months before you would open your business.

actually, you need to come back, to come back to the foreign relations ministry in order to ask for special permit to get a name, the name of your company. and what is the reason for that? i don't know, but that's a fact. so today we open a single webpage, and the name is -- [speaking in spanish] and with that you can open a new business in two hours by computer and internet, with full procedures but, of course, we need to advance at local level today. so that is part of the problem we have with this federal system, which is very difficult to align the incentives and programs, but we are moving at it. so the outcome is we are reducing the time required to start a business from almost 60

days to only nine days on average in the country. and that is quite important for us. macroeconomic stability, as i mentioned, our inflation is really probably, is the lowest inflation in several decades. you can compare these with the inflation in the region, or with other countries. we are below china. we are really below from brazil, russia, india. very close to chile, not close, but close enough to the inflation here in the united states. so, talking about public finances, i was telling that we're basically right now at two that 2.5 of gdp, including

investments. and we are far below the oecd average, talking about fiscal deficit. so that is the lesson we learned from the past, from the past mexican crisis. in the '70s, and '80s and '90s. that we need to preserve fiscal deficit. and actually we are reducing even more deficit in the country i'm talking about public debt. you can see that the average oecd, i'm sorry, i made a mistake a few minutes ago, but the average in oecd is like 52.5% of gdp. mexico has now 32% of gdp in public debt by the last year. so we are in good shape. in macro and public finance. that is a very important point. investing in infrastructure in the country. on average, we were spending like 3% of gdp, which is

actually very close to the average of oecd countries but in the oecd, the average investment in infrastructure is 3.4% of gdp. we increased the end of the month in mexico from 3% to almost 5% of gdp, which implies to invest roughly like more than $50 billion a year in infrastructure in mexico. outlook and private. ..

>> we will increase because we are expecting to finish my administration with 22,000 kilometers of new highways or rebuilding highways and roads which is the highest effort in infrastructure in several decades in mexico. but it is not only highways. for instance, some cases in terms of airports, some new airports we are building in the cortez or sonora or rebuilding others in the country. and the same, for instance, in the terms of health infrastructure. we have built in the last five years more than 1,000 new hospitals or clinics in the

country. and we have revealed 2,000 more. so more than 3,000 new or renewed hospitals or clinics in the country. and with that we are improving dramatically the condition of health services in mexico. actually, we are arriving today, this year to universal health coverage in the country. which means that any mexican people have a doctor, medicines, treatment and hospitals if they require. of course, we need to improve a lot quality and other factors, but part of the effort is in the infrastructure. to understand, it's education -- infrastructure and education. of course, this is an increase in the competitiveness in the economy as well. now, as long as we are investing in higher education -- because we have created 105 new

universities, public and free-tuition universities in these years -- and we have built 52 new campuses for another public universities in the country. today we are graduating 121,000 new engineers a year. so mexico today is graduating more engineers than germany, united kingdom, more than double brazil which actually has almost the double of our population, more engineers than italy, than spain, than canada and several other countries. and with that we are improving the condition and competitiveness of our industry. we were talking a few minutes ago about the experience and a quite interesting tale about aerospace industry. for instance, we established some years ago a new university

especially oriented towards aerospace industry. and the goal at that time was to provide well-trained workers and technicians for our projects in aerospace industry. and, in fact, mexico during this year has been the most important receiver of aerospace industry in the world. the most important destination. but as i was mentioning, one of the companies that went to mexico was, for instance, ge, general electric. and today the mexican engineers coming from that university are not only working for ge and other aerospace companies, some of them are designing the new engine for airbus 380, the

biggest airplane in the world. so we are passing from manufacturers to talent factories, if i can say that. and that is important because investing in people, investing in human capital or human value, i do prefer, is crucial to improve the condition of the people, but also to improve the condition of the economy. so the reforms have yielded valuable results for the country; competitiveness, increased trade and development of high-value-added industries. and a result of that, mexico has become a stable partner and source of economic growth for the whole north america and the whole region. let me tell you some figures about competitiveness. please, and -- [inaudible]

the movement of mexico from 2006, it is the business index from the world bank. so mexico passed from to be in the place 73rd five years ago to be in the place 53rd today. so we surpass a lot of countries, and today we are ahead of, for instance, for the rest of economies of the bricks economies, so brazil, china, india, we are above them and russia, and we are almost reaching better places in the region. so we need to advance much more, but we are doing very well in this index. you couldn't have said the same, for instance, in the world economic forum. the economy that advanced most in terms of competitiveness

according to the world economic forum was the mexican economy, advancing eight places in the last year. i want to make a point in terms of the benefits of trade and in particular the benefits of inputs into trade for total exporter, especially for manufacturers. and that is there is a clear correlation. this graph represents the relationship between manufacturing growth and tariff reduction. and so you can see tariff reductions. it means that if you are more to the right, you have more tariff reductions, and you can see in the vertical axis the real growth for that industries. and you can see the right side all these industries like

manufacturing, like automotive industry you can see above in the graph transportation equipment, you can see basic metals, rubber and plastic, known metallic mineral products and so on. so all those are growing the most despite the fact or probably due to the fact that they have -- [inaudible] and on the other side of the graph you could see the industry that are more protected still in mexico like clothing, leather and others. so they are losing competitiveness alone, they are keeping or preserving tariffs. on the same with this graph, right now this is a clear correlation, direct correlation between the middle products, imports and manufacturing exports. the more intermediate goods we

import, the more manufactured goods we export. so that is a clear correlation. more trade is more benefits for everyone. and that is crucial for the success of mexico in terms of exports of our country. look at this. beginning nafta, we used to export only -- only -- $52 billion. today we are exporting $350 billion last year. which means, as mr. donahoe said already, more than one billion a day only between united states and mexico. so that is crucial for our country. and the quality of our exports, if i can say that, you can see those pies in which by the '80s 60% of mexican export used to be oil. but today oil represents only

16% of our export. the rest is non-oil products which is another expression of mexican competitiveness. between the united states, well, you can see a little failure there in 2009, but it's increasing dramatically, and in particular you can see the free trade agreement, nafta, was in 1994 and how you can see dramatically increase if mexican -- in mexican and american bilateral trade. i was, wanted to point out, i'll move the graph. the point is today, for instance, mexican manufacturers if if you observe this figure, mexico -- not this, but let me tell you this -- mexico is exporting today more manufacturers than all latin american and caribbean countries

including brazil combined. more, we are exporting 60% of manufacturers of the region. now, another way to see the mexican increase in competitiveness is our market share in the american economy, the american imports. so you can see three years for several countries, '93, 2000, 2011. other countries like canada or japan or germany or korea or france, they are reducing their market share in american imports. but mexico is winning market share because we are passing from almost 7% in '93 to almost 12% in 2011. and we'd add it's clear that we are not only increasing our export, but we are increasing the proportion of mexican

products here in the united states. but this is not one-way story. it is not only mexican export to the united states. it is also american products going to mexico, and that is the success of nafta's story. and that implies that a lot of mexican jobs, a lot of american jobs, i'm sorry, depend on mexican imports. actually, mexico is the second largest buyer of american products. we love american products. and if you realize, i received this morning this beautiful document enhancing the u.s./mexico economic partnership. it's a report of the u.s./mexico leadership initiative where we started with the u.s. chamber, and if you have time to review, you can see in the last page this beautiful map about the states of america or the united states and for each one you can

observe the size of the export of that specific state and the number of american jobs that depends on the exports to mexico. so i strongly recommend to read this carefully later. [laughter] because i don't want to lose your attention. while i was talking about this, mexico is more export than the rest of the latin american countries come bind. combined. export by destination, of course, that is the point. is not only mexican exports towards the united states, but it's also american products going to mexico. and that means jobs for the american people and american workers. so the american exports, america -- united states export almost $200 billion to mexico every single year. somebody say that china is quite

important, the economy's growing really fast, is crucial. a lot of american exports used to go to china. yes. but we mexicans are importing more american products than chinese or japanese people combined. so we are more important death nation for -- destination for american products than china and japan together or the rest of latin american countries or europe. we are really friends of american products, and that is important to talk to the people here in the states when we are facing these block against free trade and other important issues. well, that is more or less -- and your document is by far more clear, but mexico's rank as an export market for the state, and you can see for a lot of states here mexico is the first or the

second most important market for american products. so that is quite important. finally, some comments about migration. this is a very tough issue, very sensitive, this idea that the mexican workers are, like, invading the united states. of course, we are in favor, and we really express our gratitude to the u.s. chamber for the support for a comprehensive immigration lull in the united states which is so that the people that serve, the hard workers who used to pay a lot of taxes and so on deserve comprehensive reform. but -- [applause] not only, is not only the people, businesses here in united states need workers. in particular, for instance, in agricultural sector. agricultural sector in the united states is losing a lot of

competitiveness and opportunities due to restrictions to immigration. but that's -- i would really respect the policy, but let me tell about the facts. the migration flows between the united states and mexico. you can see in the last -- in '95 to 2000 the numbers like three million mexicans came to the united states. and it was, it's very important difference between migration towards mexico, immigration coming from mexico. but today we are tying the flows. what that means, that today we are reducing migration to the united states almost to zero in net terms. why? somebody told me that today appears an article in the washington post.

i didn't want read that, but the fact is -- i didn't read that, but the fact is due several factors. because we are creating opportunities, job opportunities in mexico, educational opportunities for young people, health services and health care for entire nation. another reason probably restrictions in law enforcement, immigration here in the states, probably do the crime activities and so on. but the fact is net migration to the united states is zero today in net terms. probably is one of the most important news that we need to consider about this quite important debate. actually, a lot of people in mexican people here are thinking on coming back to our country. of course, there are others coming to the united states, but the fact is there is a switch, a

swing in terms of the opportunities. and i have not the other graph, but you can see how in these years we are observing year after year how the net, the rate of migration has been reducing and today is zero in net terms which is quite important. finally, some conclusions. in these very difficult times of the world economy, the world needs more trade and not less trade. the world needs more freedom and not less freedom. and be more investment -- and more investment, and that is the reason why protectionism, excessive nationalism, expropriation procedures are against what the world is

needing today. we need more trade, more investment and more freedom. more private companies and more certainty for everyone. we believe in trade, and we have proved the benefits of trade with nafta. and today we want more. that is the reason why mexico is opening opportunities with other latin american countries. that is the reason we are organizing the pacific alliance, because we are building a free trade sun between chile, peru, colombia and mexico. that is the reason why we are creating these specials even with the same, for instance, stock markets we are planning to share even stock markets in our countries and other quite interesting measures. that is reason why we have free trade agreement with the whole, with all the countries of

central america. that is the reason why we are planning and pushing for a free trade agreement with brazil even. unfortunately, some pressures under the brazilian government are moving back them and putting some restriction to free trade which is the benefit of no one. but the point is we need and we want more trade and more benefits, and that is the reason why mexico is pushing a lot in order to be part of the tpp, the trans-pacific partnership project. because there is a future at least in the short and medium term. the economy is growing in the pacific sea. the economy is growing in latin american countries and the asian countries. if we are able to match this potential, we will meet the tpp

initiative and others, i'm very sure, that we will get all the benefits of next decade for our country. those are my comments, and thank you for all your attention. thank you. [applause] >> that was a terrific, comprehensive overview of mexico's competitiveness. let me see if i can summarize very quickly. first of all, you want to continue to enhance trade around the world between mexico and the rest of the world, 44 trade agreements. two, you've reduced public debt. three, you want to invest in education reform and the people and, fourth, of course, you want to deregulate. gee, that sounds like the u.s. chamber's agenda here in the united states. [laughter] and after your tenure as president, maybe tom donohue will invite you back to the chamber to talk about how we can

work together. i thought that was a terrific, comprehensive speech not only because you also plugged the u.s. chamber's mexico initiative -- and we thank you for your strong support -- but because it gave you a true sense of what has happened in mexico under president calderon's leadership. i'd like to open up the floor for a few questions. go ahead. please -- of course, introduce -- even know you're known to all of us, please, introduce yourself. >> thank you. jose, i just want to congratulate president calderon for his great speech today, but mainly because of the numbers you have presented to us today, and i'm sure i'm speaking on behalf of all the people of mexico to congratulate you during these five years. you have really supported free trade, you have really supported foreign investment in mexico, and that is something that is helping the country and the numbers are showing it today. congratulations, mr. president.

>> thank you. thank you, and good luck with kansas city -- [inaudible] [applause] >> is there a question? question? go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. steven donahue from mclarty associates. you've given us a wonderful review of all the reasons that free trade works, and it's something that we need to be reminded of often here and, as you said, as you instructed us, we need to remind our populations in both countries of that. some of the neighbors in the southern cone don't quite have the same attitude. as you take your leadership role at the g20 meeting coming up, what is the message you have for some of the participants in that meeting that perhaps have taken a less positive view towards free trade, are being more protectionist and involved in expropriations? >> well, first, we are taking

seriously our responsibility chairing the g20. and, actually, we are working in several priorityies, of course, stabling economic situation and improving growth conditions, redefining, reinforcing international financial architecture, foot security, green growth among others. so talking specifically about your point, for us is absolutely clear that one of the most important alternatives in order to recover growth in the world economy is trade, investment, private companies, freedom. so in that sense the measures from the whole group must be the same. we need more and not less trade,

and we need more certainty and no less certainty. i do believe with full respect to other colleagues that expropriation process are really thinks about the past. and no one lose more in an expropriations than the countries who used to do that. at least in these times. because what developing economy needs is more foreign investment and not less. and not too much people rationally will invest in all those countries who used to expropriate. and i hope that, on the other hand, i hope that this issue particular stories, particular cases i'm very sure won't avoid

to reach agreement in the g20. we need to expression in terms of principles, and we need to stand for them, but at the same time we need to move forward with the very complex scenario we are looking. and that is important because we are making really bold steps this terms of international -- in terms of international problems we are facing. i remember very well that in december what's crazy, the financial outlook especially in europe, and i remember it went to davos last january, i spoke in the forum, and i told that, for instance, we need to address with a very strong leadership and decisive action the problems in europe. and we are all passengers of the same boat, and we need to take care about the failures of the ship together. is not only problem of european

branch, is not a question that they need to face, we need to support quickly the bold solution we are requiring. and the solutions are not only making internal adjustment in the economies which is absolutely needed in spain and italy and greece and so on, but also international support is crucial. and in that sense it is necessary more action coming from the european countries and their central bank and other mechanisms they have already in place, but also international action. what happened later? we organize a summit of minister of finances in mexico. it was a very successful one, let me tell you. and we started to open this great lock. it's like a chicken game, no? the rest of the world is

waiting, but we are not going to do anything, at least, you europeans do your own homework. you have a lot of money, do yourself. and the europeans saying well, come on. is not my problem, i will wait for your support. so we started to grow that good luck, and then the countries started to cooperate. and last march the european countries arrive to very important conclusion regarding financial support there. is it enough? probably not in terms of the response of the market. but we are moving, and we are on track, in my opinion, to a bold solution. and last friday here in united states there was another meeting of financial ministers. and they, and there we arrive at very important conclusions. we committed more than $430

billion to imf. what does that mean? we are more than doubled -- doubling the support to imf in order to prepare this institution to sport local action -- to support local action in europe or other part of the world. it's a very important news, very important news, and you need realize this. that support to imf is without the united states. unfortunately. i don't want to say that they are not helping or you are not helping. the treasury is doing a lot, but we realize the american government has a lot of political restrictions and need to pass a special law into congress in order to do so. but the point is even without the united states, we got to the imf the support is needed to be ready to participate in the solution. so the, how do you say the cavalry? spanish push. >>