the crash. .. >> in our partnership on transportation in indian country, it doesn't just improve safety, it also connects people to opportunity. we know and you know that a rebuilt road or a new transit system can be the difference between a child getting to school on time or the difference

between an elder going to the doctor or not. and no one knows better than america's tribal leaders that a safe, reliable transportation system is a key to accessing good jobs. it's why last year the federal transit administration awarded more than $15 million from from our tribal transit program to help 72 tribal governments provide the critical transportation services that thousands depend on every day. it's also why a total of $30 million has been authorized for tribal transit rams for fy-2013 and fy-2014. that's a doubling of available funds. >> we're going to leave this program now to go to the white house for today's press briefing just beginning. >> happy friday. thanks for being here. did i hear a yea for friday? yea for friday.

>> a little premature. >> it is friday. [laughter] wait, are you -- are you questioning the premise of the assertion that it's friday? [laughter] [inaudible conversations] wow. [inaudible conversations] >> you're bitter the president had a press conference? >> he was in cleveland. >> mark, i'm sorry. can we make sure that doesn't happen again? is. >> thank you. >> okay. [laughter] >> [inaudible] >> cleveland was -- [inaudible conversations] >> cleveland was fantastic. that factory is unbelievable. those rolls of steel? >> quite amazing. >> quite amazing. [inaudible conversations] >> they probably didn't weigh -- yeah. didn't, i think somebody told me, i'm not sure it's accurate, that one of those rolls is 40,000 pounds? >> 40 tons, something like that.

>> i think our hour's up. >> we missed all that. we were busy here. >> oh, sorry about that. okay. so my only topper here is that i do have a hard stop at 1:50, so we'll get right to your questions. at the end of questions, i do have a week ahead for you. jim? >> thanks, jay. president is meeting with insurance company ceos this afternoon. it seems that the announcement yesterday's getting some pushback and second guessing from the industry, from actuaries, from even some insurance commissioners who say that it could result in higher premiums, and i'm wondering whether this meeting is something that should have taken place ahead of time rather than after the fact? and do you, does the white house accept or disagree with this possibility that premiums could increase because of this decision? >> well, there's a couple of issues here. we do disagree with the assertion that this is not

something that cannot be dealt with. in fact, part of the fix that the president announced was instructions to -- included instructions to hhs to adjust the risk corridor, what's called the risk corridor, the policy that allows for adjustments if, for example, the pool is less healthy than expected or more healthy than expected and there are cost changes accordingly. so we believe, i mean, there's a lot of data here about portion of the population that's affected here. the fact that there's a myth about, you know, while there are healthy people, generally healthier people in the individual market because insurance companies could discriminate against those who weren't healthy, the fact is that it's a myth that there are particularly young in the individual market. in fact, there's data that shows

that, you know, the disproportionate be number of people in the insurance market are older americans, are, you know, 40 and up. so having said that, as this policy rolls out and allowing those with plans in the individual market to renew those plans for a more extended period of time, the hhs has the capacity to adjust the risk corridor accordingly if necessary. >> but you still -- i mean, you have actuaries saying, i mean, is it because they're not taking into account what hhs will be able to do in is that what you're saying? >> well, i haven't seen the actuaries' reports. what i'm saying is that hhs has the capacity because of the provision within the aca to make adjustments in in this risk corridor to deal with changes in costs, swings in costs associated with either more or

less risk within the pool of people insured. so, i mean, the way it works is if costs are higher, then hhs can mitigate those costs with insurers. if costs come in significantly lower, then the insurers replenish the fund by passing off -- passing back some of those profits back. so we believe there's a mechanism here to deal with any swings associated with this provision which, remember, again the size of the population we're talking about here. 5% of the country's in the individual insurance market. a portion of that 5% is affected by the cancellation notices. and what the fix the president announced allows is for, it basically removes the prohibition from the aca that said those policies could not be renewed, you know, from 2014 into 2015. they have -- this is something

we haven't talked a lot about, but even under the law prior to the president's announcement yesterday, insurers were able to offer renewals of these policies, early renewals of these policies to their policyholders. and so this extends that possibility so that if you had a plan that was effective through september of next year, you could renew it so that it could go all the way through august 31st, say, of 2015. so it's a way of smoothing the transition. it's a way of making an adjustment in response to the problems we saw with the cancellation notices and with that segment of the 5% that was put in this position to, where they did not feel that they had the, you know, opportunity to take advantage of marketplace plans that would reduce their costs or keep costs the same.

and, you know, the president made clear that he feels like a fix was necessary. so he looks forward to the implementation of this, looks forward to working with congress as on any sip sere effort -- sincere effort, good faith effort to make improvements to the affordable care act. >> having announced this yesterday and having the meeting today, doesn't that put the cart before the hours many. >> >> well, jim, i think it is absolutely the case that we have within in consultation with and have had numerous meetings with insurance companies over the course of the last several years with the drafting and passing and implementation of the affordable care act. and those consultations continue. the president looks forward to the meeting he's having later this afternoon with insurers, and we'll talk about ways we can work together to help people enroll through the marketplace and efforts we can make to minimize disruption for consumers as they transition to new coverage. >> given the numbers, again,

they're only numbers, has the white house given any consideration or have you set aside any thought of extending the, extending a waiver period for the mandatory -- [inaudible] the individual mandate so that it doesn't kick in on march 31st as scheduled? >> jim, as we said all along, the individual responsibility provision is essential to the affordable care act because it is what insures that individuals with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied insurance. it allows for the rest of the affordable care act to be implemented effectively so that the benefits that the american people deserve are able to be distributed. so we are, obviously, working on a tighter time frame because of the problems with the web site and the slow, the slowness

associated with the rollout and the enrollment period, but we do have a six month enrollment period. we are a month and a half into that. so we're working assiduously to make improvements to the web site so that that experience continues to get were better for consumers and more and more americans are able to enroll. >> so under no circumstance would there be a consideration? >> well, i'm not going to speculate about the future. what i'm going to tell you is right now we are focused on making the changes and fixes necessary to the web site to improve that experience for consumers and also to work in a variety of ways to make it easier for americans to enroll. i mean, one of the things that remains true is that this is enormous interest in the quality, affordable coverage available on the market places, and where we were unsuccessful is in making that access to that

coverage easy from day one, october 1st. and as the president, i think, made clear to you here yesterday, he takes responsibility for that. we take responsibility for that. and we're about the business of making the fixes necessary to insure that those benefits are available to the american people who so clearly want them. >> jay, henry chow was raising red flags back in july about the web site saying the plane could crash on takeoff. was the white house aware of these concerns at the time? >> steve, we said all along i know that there's selective leaks going on out of various house committees of, as they conduct oversight into this, but we said all along that there were in the testing of this instances where there were problems that were identified and fixes that were undertaken to the welcome back site. the web site. what we did not expect was that we would have the size problem

that we had come october 1st. in and -- if we had expected that, we wouldn't have been promoting the launch of the web site in the run-up to it in the way that we were. president was very candid about that. i mean, it does not stand the test of logic to suggest that we somehow knew that the web site would perform as poorly as it did and a week before or four days before were encouraging people to go to it and talking about how it would be fairly functional and effective. so there's no question if the point of these selective leaks is to get everybody to recognize that the web site performed terribly on october 1st, i don't think that's a point that anybody here is denying. so what we're focused on is making the fixes necessary so that the web site works in a

way, in the way that it was intended to. >> another question, you would like to extend unemployment benefits. what offsets in the budget are you willing to consider to make that happen? >> i appreciate the question. i think that while we have made substantial progress in bringing the economy back from the brink, there is no question that there are still too many americans out of work. and as a nation, we have always taken the approach that in addition to the basic unemployment benefits available to those who lose their jobs and are looking for work, emergency unemployment compensation should be available in times when the labor market is not at full strength. and while the labor market has been improving, it is not, clearly, at full strength. at the end of the year, emergency unemployment compensation is set to expire. and that means that 1.3 million unemployed americans will lose unemployment insurance benefits. these benefits are crucial for maintaining incomes of the

unemployed and their families and have been shown to reduce poverty and increase the chances of returning the unemployed worker to a good job. independent studies have also shown that in terms of economic impact these benefits have a big bang for the buck because, as you know and anybody who covers these kinds of issues knows, that those benefits flow right back into the economy because almost by definition those who are strapped and need unemployment benefits are using the benefits that they receive right away and spending them and injecting that money back into the economy which helps spur growth and create jobs. so as gene sperling mentioned yesterday -- i think that's why i'm getting the question -- the president believes we should extend this provision through the end of 2014, and we are confident that congress will join us in this effort. and we're confident of that because if you look back, unemployment compensation, emergency unemployment compensation has always been extended when the unemployment rate is near current levels. that was the case under

president george w. bush, and it's been the case in the aftermath or in the recovery from the great recession. so we'll work with congress for how to make that happen, but we're confident that congress will join us in extending these benefits. let me move around. victoria? yeah. >> um, question is the whistleblowers yesterday at the committee hearing was talking about the secret service's apparent sex escapades in 17 countries and visiting bordellos, hiring prostitutes, having one-night stands as well as longer-term relationships with foreign nationals wolf not been cleared -- who have not been cleared. given this level of what seems to be inappropriate sexual activity going on with the secret service, what is the president's level of confidence in them at this point in. >> the president believes deeply

that the vast majority of the men and women who work for the u.s. secret service exemplify the high standards of service and that they workday and night professionally to protect the president and presidents before him and presidents -- and they will after him as well as his family and presidential families as well as other protectees. you know, issues that have arisen including the visit to colombia and other issues that arise are, you know, the president is confident that they will be fully investigated and that action a, where appropriate, will be taken. and he believes that the leadership at the secret service, including the new director, will address matters as they arise appropriately. but it is important to note that the president believes very strongly that these men and women are professionals and that they put their lives on the line

to protect the commander in the chief, protect the president, protect his or her family. and that's a very weighty responsibility, and he greatly appreciates it. >> does he think that the new director has taken action to act on the kinds of allegations that have been in place before she came in? >> i know that the president believes very strongly that director pearson is the right person for the job and has great confidence in her leadership. i don't have a specific reaction to any investigation that might be ongoing or accusations that might be leveled currently except to say that the president has absolute confidence in the leadership at the secret service. yes. >> question about this insurance fix the president announced yesterday. it does introduce a little bit of uncertainty here. so what advice would you guys give, if any, to the people who have gotten these cancellation

letters. do they call their insurance company back? do they call the state insurance commissioners? do they keep trying to roll on? what should they do in the meantime, trying to figure out whether their companies are going to offer them? >> well, they -- a couple things. one, what the president did and do and the secretary has the authority to do is, essentially, waive the provision within the affordable care can act that would make new plans, you know, plans beyond the current early enrollment phase become compliant with minimum standards. and, obviously, because we have a system where state insurance commissioners have great authority over the markets in their states, this is something that insurance companies and insurance commissioners will make the ultimate decision on in terms of offering to extend the renewal period or to offer to

renew policies in the individual market. where cancellation notices might have gone out. what is also required in the fix that the president announced yesterday is that if that offer is made, insurers need to make clear to their customers what benefits are available to them or the fact that benefits are available to them through the marketplace. and also what benefits that might come to them under the new standards are missing in the plans that they might be renewing. so it's basically, you know, eyes wide open is the way, you know, so that the consumers have the most amount of information possible as they make this decision. and the whole goal here is to address the problem that has arisen and to give consumers more options as they begin this transition into an insurance

marketplace where over the long run costs will be contained, minimum benefits will be offered, and you won't be in a situation which has existed up to this very moment where if you're in the individual market, you tend to be doing okay as long as you're healthy because, a, you'll be offered insurance if you're healthy, and you might be thrown off insurance once you get sick, but you also in this current environment you might pay more if you're a woman, you might pay double even for the same coverage, and you might find that you do not have caps on out-of-pocket expenses, so you could be confronted with a $40 or $50,000 bill that's not covered. you know, these are the kinds of things that the affordable care act was designed to fix. and what the president announced yesterday was a solution to a problem that helps the transition into those marketplaces occur more smoothly.

>> it sounds like people who are affected here won't necessarily know for some time whether -- >> we believe that insurers certainly can generate letters just like they did already to their customers that advise them of this new opportunity if they choose to make that opportunity available to them. and if there is time to do that. so, you know, we're obviously going to be working with insurers and working with states on this matter, but we believe there is time, and we believe it's, you know, a solution to a problem that has clearly arisen that the president wants addressed. >> one more larger one. we know that the affordable care act has been under fire from the very beginning, the problems with the web site, people getting cancellation letters have only made matters worse. so the question is what do you say to the folks who are wondering if the president's going to be able to get back on track and be able to have a productive second term, get his agenda through legislatively? how's he going to do that? what do you say to -- >> i think he's going to do it

by waking up every day and focusing on addressing the concerns that the american people have, that they want their elected leaders here in washington to focus on. and that's -- and that means, in this case, making the affordable care act deliver on its promise, deliver the benefits that it are provide when implemented to millions and millions of americans. there's no question that this has been a problem in its rolling out of the policy, as the president, i think, pretty aptly acknowledged yesterday. but this is an issue that goes to whether or not we are successfully delivering benefits to the american people, delivering on a policy that promises to continue to rein in health care spending over the long term, that provides minimum benefits to americans, that prohibits insurance companies from denying you coverage because you have even a minor pre-existing condition. this is, obviously, a challenge,

and we're facing the challenge, and we're up to the challenge. but when it comes to, you know, what it means more broadly, i think it just goes right to the heart of the fact that the american people want their elected leaders working for them. and this president wakes up every day focused on what he can do to work for hard working americans and make their lives a little easier, a little better and a little more secure. that's what he's going to do every day that he's in office. john. >> jay, we've already heard from three state insurance commissioners that say the president's plan simply is not workable. i mean, what's that going to do for people in those states, washington state, arkansas, vermont, all those insurance commissioners said this just won't work, they're not going to do it. >> well, john, i can also cite kentucky, florida and california, i think collectively states of higher population, states that have said they will -- they've announced they will allow insurer toss renew -- >> [inaudible] >> well, john, what you are

identifying is the insurance world that we live in in the united states where state insurance commissioners, commissions obviously have a great deal of authority about how insurance is marketed and sold in their state. so we are going to work with states. it has always been the case even up to, as i noted earlier -- and this is rarely acknowledged or discussed -- but that the affordable care act has within it the provision that allows insurance companies in those states where the state insurance commissions allow it to renew existing policies already. and that was true prior to the robs that we've seen in the last -- problems that we've seen in the last several weeks with cancellation notices. what the president's fix does is extend that renewal period, but it has always been the case because, as the president said yesterday, we were trying to build on the existing system to cause the least amount of disruption. state insurance commissions have authority in their states to govern how policies are marketed and sold and to set standards

for those policies. >> so what do you say to a guy in washington state, canceled -- his insurance policy was canceled, he was out of luck, took great hope from what the president said, and then a few hours later find out that it's not going to apply to him because the insurance commissioner says the plan's not workable. >> well, john, i would say that what the president said yesterday is he wants to continue to work with lawmakers of both parties who are engaged in a good faith effort to make improvements to the affordable care act and even to address this particular issue. the fact -- >> insurance at the end of the year and is faced now with paying a premium twice as expensive -- >> well, i, as has always been the case, i don't know -- when you throw out an individual to me, i don't have a capacity -- >> cancellation notice in washington state. >> well, no, it wouldn't apply -- what you just cited about the premium wouldn't necessarily apply to every individual. the fact of the matter is, and these cases aren't usually brought into the briefing room

here, that more than half of people who get in the -- >> [inaudible] >> oh, absolutely. and i think you heard the president here at length talk about his concern there for thoe people, and that's why he's making this fix and why he's going to work every day to do what he can and then to do, work with congress so they can do what they can to make the affordable care act implementation go more smoothly and work effectively for the american people. what is absolutely the case, john, is that the affordable care act, when implemented, will allow americans across the country, millions of americans to purchase affordable, quality health insurance for many of whom that was something that was not possible before. and even as we deal with the problems that are arising with the implementation of the affordable care act, it is absolutely essential that we remember what the alternative here is. and the president talked about this a little bit yesterday. when critics point out -- and

they justifiably point out the problems with implementation and then they say, well, we should then do away with obamacare, the affordable care act, they are saying they want to go back to the status quo ante. which in this market, i don't know about this individual, but anybody in the individual market was subjected to extreme increases annually in their premiums, to a situation where insurance companies regularly either dropped or abruptly changed the policies that were offered to them, downgrading the coverage that was offered to individuals. and that's why in some, to some degree one of the reasons why we're seeing this problem is because there is, has been and is so much churn in that market. so that the number of people who got cancellation notices was as high as it was, because so few policies are maintained for very long because individuals come in and out of that market because

it's the worst place to be. it has traditionally been the worst place to be. so if you're somebody who buys an individual policy because you have to because you're if between jobs or you have a job where your employer doesn't offer it and then you get a job with an employer who does, you're going to go with the employer-provided insurance because the benefits currently available on the insurance market are often substandard, and that is something that the affordable care act was specifically designed to address. >> but i have to ask you the president said yesterday i was not informed directly the web site would not be working the way it was supposed to. i mean, we've heard the latest is the project manager on healthcare.gov warned, was worried this thing could crash at takeoff. i'm just wondering, did the president at any point ask the question has this thing been tested? are we ready to go? what was the answer to that. >> the president was regularly briefed on the implementation in

the runup to the launch. what he and others have said is that we -- at no time did we anticipate that the problems that we ended up seeing on october 1st would occur. and if we had -- >> [inaudible] >> but, john. >> people working on this knew there were problems, and i'm just asking did the president ask the question? >> absolutely. the president constantly asked where we were and -- >> so. [inaudible] >> again, there's a jump in your logic there. the fact is as we acknowledged and have said since october 1st and even before that, we anticipated glitches, we were told there might be some problems, and as is the case when any site -- could i finish? john? i know we're creating an exchange here, but if i could just finish for one second that the fact is when a site like this is being developed and there are problems, checklists are developed and problems are addressed. and we believed that the

problems were being addressed and that while there would be some glitches upon launch on october 1st that, obviously, we never anticipated that we would have the kind of severe problems that we had. the site would function as poorly as it did. and i really ask for everyone to take a step back and look at the logic here of suggesting that somehow we or anybody responsible for it knew that we would have the problems that we had on october 1st. >> but the project manager is saying that he was worried it could crash on takeoff. >> i addressed this when steve asked it a few minutes ago. >> this isn't crashing, this is, you know -- >> again, i think it would be, i would advise everyone who is susceptible to taking these partial transcript reeks from committee -- leaks from committee staff, and i think again and again we've seen when the full story is revealed that committee staff hasn't really been completely transparent with you and others, that it would be

wise to look at the whole story, and that would be the case in in this instance, and i think almost invariably the case when committee staff is trying to make a political point. there is no question that this goes to the fundamental issue has the web site functioned effectively? that's why we're focused on fixing it and not focused on dribbling out information to score political points. we're focused on getting it right because this is about a policy that will deliver benefits to millions of americans who deserve them and have earned them. john christopher. >> as you know, senator lindsey graham has threatened to put a hold on all confirmations by the president including that of janet yellen, the new chair of the federal reserve, until he receives information he's requested on benghazi.

what steps is the administration taking to resolve this issue and insure the confirmation of ms. be yellen and continuity at the federal reserve which, in fact, could effect world markets? >> well, we're very confident that janet yellen is absolutely the right candidate for the job. her hearing yesterday, we felt, went very well, and it offered an opportunity for her to take questions from committee members of both parties. when it comes to benghazi, we have -- and i will spare everyone here the recitation of the amount of cooperation that we have shown oversight committees with reames of documents and numerous interviews and testimony in hearings, and that will -- that continues. so we are working with congress on this as we always do, and we absolutely believe that the president's highly qualified nominees should not be held,

they should be given the votings that they deserve -- the votes that they deserve, and we look forward to their confirmation. cheryl. >> yes. do you have either a firm number on a pretty good estimate of the number of cancellation letters that have actually gone out nationwide? >> you know, i meant to mention at the start, you know, i think it's this afternoon cms is doing its regular briefing, and i would encourage you to participate in those briefings. they're going to have more detailed information. i don't know if they have a number on that. the reports in the press vary widely. i think it's important to note that when you look at the number of people who, for example, get benefits in the marketplaces, tax credits and the like, it's 17 million, and i think the largest number i've seen in terms of cancellation letters is three and a half million, and i don't even know if that's accurate. so i would refer you to cms. major. >> do you, you implied a second ago that there's a fuller story

about mr. chow's testimony that jonathan referred to. would you like to -- >> no. i'm simply saying it has been the case again and again and again with certain committees that partial information is produced or leaked to reporters or put out in press releases that upon further scrutiny is not quite what they say it was. >> -- [inaudible] dispute what that represents him thinking and fearing before the launch -- >> what i can tell you is there is certainly, it is certainly the case that in the period leading up to the launch that individuals involved in it saw problems that needed fixing, and those problems were identified and addressed. we belief they would -- we believe they were addressed sufficiently so that the side would launch with some glitches, but effectively on october 1st, and that did not happen. so, again, the logic around this is to suggest that somehow

inside the administration, you know, we all knew or somebody knew that the thing was not going to work effectively october 1st, and yet we were out there talking about the importance of the launch on october 1st and how everybody b should go to the web site and take advantage of it, i don't think if you follow that logic to its conclusion that it makes any sense at all. ..

>> premiums are locked in for 2014. they're locked in and said, that is a fact. >> you don't have to reject within by reassuring policies that been canceled? >> the fact of the matter is, any of the existing -- this is one of the things consumers need to be aware of, as was the case always in the individual market, which was the least regulated portion of the insurance market, these policies were subject to substantial premium increases. happen all the time. the average was 15%. they were also subject to downgrading on a regular basis where individuals have a policy for you but they got sick, then they could be dropped. none of that exist now in the affordable care act in the marketplaces that are protections for those individuals. if you choose to renew that existing policy, you need to do so, understanding, and this is where we're asking the insurance companies to make it clear to the consumers of these facts, that you do not get the tax

credits that might be available to you but also some of the other protections that would come with policies that fit the minimum standards under the affordable care act. >> you have any idea or estimate how may people fall into this particular category? it's a smaller category. >> know. i think this is what cheryl was asking, i've seen a lot of reports. i would encourage you to persuade in the cms briefings that they have. they may have more details about this. i think the reports have buried. it is a portion of the 5% of the population to participate in the individual market. what we know is that 5%, a million -- what's going on? [inaudible] spent anybody wants to go get on the call, ken. you might get answers to the specific question for numbers. but in any case, of the 5%, a

million roughly would be eligible for medicaid in the states that have expanded it. and when we talk about -- here's again, context. these individuals are of great concern to the president, the ones have been adversely affected by this who he feels responsibly for taking steps to fix problems to make the transition smoother, to allow insurance companies, state insurance commissioners to ensure they can renew their policies if they so desire. and making sure they are aware of what their alternatives our and some of the alternatives might be genetically better for them both in the benefits they receive and the cost that they occur -- enter. one thing that is absolutely the case when you talk about this, more globally is also state that there that have refused to expand medicaid are depriving millions of americans of insurance coverage. millions. more that are affected by these cancellation policies. that's a fact and it's a

problematic fact, because a lot of those individuals are better who could be getting medicaid insurance under the expansion of medicaid, created by the affordable care act, but for ideological reasons, governors have and some states declined to do that. not all republican government. as we know in ohio where the president was yesterday, arizona, florida, other states with republican governors they have made the decision to right by their constituents and expand medicaid, and make quality insurance available to millions of low income americans who need it. so we have a problem we are trying to fix. specific to the section, subsection of that 5% of the population, but there are other issues here that we need to work together to fix and that's why we continue to urge governors in states that have expanded medicaid to do so for their

constituents. not because of the ideologic -- they may be ideologically opposed to the president over to a health care reform that has his name on it, but the bottom line is they have the opportunity to help their citizens. >> it's no secret to that house democrats and senate democrats were urging the president to make public whatever fixes going to have to this problem before the house votes today. and give them a place or position to take or a policy response to point to so they wouldn't be exposed to possibly something else innocent. does the president, the white house with this fix settle the issue at least for now and does not require legislative intervention of the kind every land and other democrats are continuing to export? >> the president said in his remarks, in his prepared remarks yesterday that he wants to work with lawmakers of both parties

who are engaging good-faith effort to make improvements to the affordable care act, so that speech on this particular issue? >> we absolutely do not support and oppose the upton bill, because it is -- whatever the intentions, and i think house republicans intention towards the affordable care act have been pretty clear but what of the intentions of that particular bill, it certainly, while maybe fixing the problem potentially of those who receive cancellation notices, it also by allowing insurers to sony policies to new customers that don't meet the standards is deliberately are not designed to undermine the affordable care act in the long run. and i think you would find if you talked to many insurers, that they would have serious problems with something like that. because it would undercut the marketplace and it would create a situation that would be very hard to sustain.

wendel. >> since president can't compel insurers to renew these policies, what's he going to say them to convince them or to persuade them which i gather -- >> look, there are a lot of issues that the president looks forward to discussing with insurers today, when it comes to implementation of the affordable care act. this is one of them. i think he will certainly raise with them, you know, what this fix does and why he thinks it's the right thing to do, and encourage them to offer renewals to those customers who might want to avail themselves of that choice. the purpose is to provide a choice. it's not to compel people to renew or to compel people to choose any particular plan within the marketplace. it's to make them, to give them this option. and when you give them the option to also make them aware

of what's available to them in the marketplace. and also make them aware of what they do not get in terms of protections and benefits, if they choose to stick with an individual market plan that does not meet the minimal standards of the affordable care act spent but it would act insurance companies to act rather swiftly over the next 30 days or so. what would he say to persuade him to make that effort? >> well, i think you will talk about, and i think there was a very lengthy briefing yesterday in which officials morphed into the minutia of the policy to try to explain how it works to reporters, but i think he would explain how we envision this working, how we are confident that it would not, for example, in the questions i got at the top of the briefing, create adverse problems for the affordable care act when it came to the risk pools because of the

flexibility the secretary has to make adjustments. and i'm sure those issues will be discussed. the goal here is to make this transition as smooth -- smooth as possible for those americans who have been affected by cancellation notices and, yeah, maybe in a position of finding their best option in their view the renewal of an existing policy, even if it doesn't meet minimum standards and doesn't give the protections that the new plans would offer. and this extends that possibility. it's important to remember again when we talk about the world as it existed before the announcement yesterday, that every insured in the state where this is allowed could have and could offer renewals of those plans already. what the president announced yesterday would simply extend the renewal spent what's the authority? i asked the in the same way people ask whether he had the authority to basically wave the

mandate for larger businesses. what is his authority for doing this today? >> the secretary has the authority under the law just -- your district the secretary's authority can be used in narrow circumstances the easy implementation short of legislative changes. this is one of those instances. there are individual from the implementation of consumer protections without a transition will result in a loss of an existing plant even though the law includes a section on the preservation of the rights to maintaining existing coverage. what i talked to you about earlier. so the type of action was used for last year in the administration policy on deferred action for child of a rival pending immigration reform, an example that was something that dhs did. so this is authority that exists for the secretary to use to help smooth the application of this policy. peter.

[inaudible] if you want 157, simple language and not, that is what? >> this is the upton bill. because whatever its intention, the plan would by allowing insurers to sell substandard policies to new customers, not simply to renew, allow those individuals and other policies and receive cancellations to renew them, but sell those policies to new customers unlimited number of new customers would undermine the central premise of the affordable care act which is that there should be minimum standards for everyone and that insurance companies should not be able to in the new marketplace is still plans that charge twice as much with the charger, that put annual caps on what benefits you can receive, that give you doctors visits but not hospitalization, that give you coverage but not your child

even because your child has asthma. so this is, the problem with the upton bill and why the president will veto it if it ever gets to his desk is because it would basically come again, whether this is the intention of the author or not, it would basically go back to come in that market, the world that existed before, which i think it's important to remember even as we have these legitimate discussions about the problems with rollout of the affordable care act, it's not a world most people would want to remain living in. for those who have to suffer of the insurance market as individuals. so that's why it won't work. >> now already we've heard from at least three states that say they are not going to allow the change from yesterday, the idea presented by the white house to go forward. with the president reach out to the states and push them to do that? what does he say directly to those individuals in the state

who say you made those promises to meet another don't apply to me? >> what the president will do in his team will do is work with every state to try to discuss the benefits of this fix. [inaudible] >> i think i have this question earlier but the answers the president will continue to work. he is doing, he did yesterday -- [inaudible] >> he did yesterday what he can do administratively. to address this problem. he will work with congress to do, so that congress can do what it can do legislatively in a good faith effort to address problems, to improve the implications of the affordable care act. what he won't get the support policies that are designed to sabotage, repeal, undermined the affordable care act. >> people are upset. who should they be upset with? who should the play be directed to?

the insurance company is saying -- >> two things. one, the president i think accepted an ample amount of responsibility before you yesterday. no question. [inaudible] >> let's also be clear, and it is absolutely incumbent on anyone, the reality of the individual market, which is that the things that happened to consumers in the market every year can continue to happen. unless individuals end up in the marketplace would have the protections under the affordable care act. so one of the reasons why we got where we are is because insurers have been able to come in that market, to sell you a plan because you're healthy, and then when you get sick during the year that planned and that contract was in effect, refuse

to renew your policy the next you because you now have a preexisting condition. they could study of plant and then take the same plan and market it to a woman of the exact same age in the exact same health and charger up to twice as much. so i can this is not about blame but i think it is important to understand what individuals in the market have been dealing with for a long, long time. and problems in the market that of in real and have nothing to do with them come with the affordable care act, except in the fact that the affordable care act was designed in part to prevent those problems from traveling with us into the future spent the president said there will be an intensity violation. already is asking a lot of tough questions of his team to figure how we got to this point. as the president than anything, communicate anything to his team to go forward now with some form of after action report given the fact the october 1 deadline has already passed? what is he doing right now?

>> peter, i think the answer to that is no because the president right now has cas passed his tem and it went involved in this effort to the work needed to improve the website and to improve the implementation of the affordable care act, and the delivery of the benefits of the affordable care act. i think there are obvious that already efforts underway in congress to engage in oversight. with the president is focused on and what his team is focused on is doing the work necessary to make sure that the affordable care act works for the american people. >> do you believe that people should be a cannibal even if that process hasn't happened yet? >> i think the president stood up in front of yesterday as he did in an interview on your network last week and took responsibility for the problems that have arisen with rollout of the affordable care act. he is accountable, and his team is accountable. and no, that's why he has assigned them to work overtime,

to make these fixes and get it right. chris spent yesterday speaker boehner said -- [inaudible] given the repeated statements in opposition of the bill, is there any reconsideration from the white house? >> chris, i appreciate the question and the speaker's comments are of course a disappointing. i think that those who oppose this legislation are taking the wrong position. and they are taking a decision that i think history will prove to be wrong, as has been the case in seminal civil rights legislation throughout our history in this country. basic decor is fundamental to who we are as a nation. and our history is in part a

story of efforts and struggles to reach those ideals, where equality is not only an aspiration but the fact. the employment nondiscrimination act is a piece of that story, and it ought to be passed by congress, passed by the house as it was by the senate. because this president will sign it into law. and we believe that we have come a long way, and i know you and i have had this conversation over the course of the last several years, and i think that it's fair to say that there may be some close observers we did not think we get where we ar are now with us and as pass this legislation with bipartisan support. so we are not at already to believe that the fight is over in the house. because it is the president's strong conviction that this is the right thing to do, and that

the arguments against it do not hold up to scrutiny or the test of history. so we will keep fighting for the house to take it up, and urging the house to take it a. we believe that if it were, given a vote on the floor that it would pass. and that democrats and republicans would vote yes. and the president would sign into law. and we believe as we discussed, uni, over these past many months and years that that is the best solution, and we'll continue to fight for it. >> the president open to the idea threatening -- summit. >> look, i think we're focused on getting this legislation passed right now, chris. for the reasons i just discussed, we believe that resistance to it, will eventually fall away. because the ripeness of it will prevail but let me give you a week ahead, please. on sunday the first family will attend the oregon state versus

users at maryland basketball game in college park, maryland. on monday the present will attend meetings here at the white house. on tuesday the president will deliver remarks at "the wall street journal"'s ceo council's annual meeting. hat tip to dow jones over there. on wednesday, the president will awarded the presidential medal of freedom. first lady will also attend. the medal of freedom is our nation's highest civilian honor presented to individuals who have made especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interest of the united states, to world peace or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors. the medal will be presented at the white house in a morning ceremony. on thursday the president will attend meetings at the white house. and on friday the president will host king mohammed the six of morocco at the white house. the visit will highlight the long-standing friendship between united states and morocco in strengthen our strategic partnership to the president

looks forward to discussing a range of issues of mutual interest with the king including support for morocco's democratic and economic reforms. this visit is also an opportunity to increase our cooperation on addressing region challenges including countering violent extremism, supporting democratic transitions and promoting economic development in the middle east and africa. that is your week ahead. thank you all very much. have a great weekend. >> will you send out something -- [inaudible] >> many questions focus on problems with the healthcare.gov website, as well as extending current health care plans. president obama wants to allow insurance companies to continue to sell health plans that do not meet the minimum requirements of the health care law. you want to allow only for one

year and only for existing plants. the house today voted to allow health plans that don't meet the requirements current as well as new health plans to be sold indefinitely. that vote was two under 67-157. -- 267-157. on facebook, we're asking your opinion. you can offer your thoughts on facebook.com/cspan. now it's a look at iran to the world affairs council of las vegas recently hosted mideast expert gerald green, author of the book understanding iran in late october launch.

>> i don't know if i need. and you may? i'm loud about the not sure i need a mic. but if you can't commit just let me know. i really want to thank paul for inviting me to speak. he is my pal of some 30 years, but he's also an extraordinarily distinguished, not only expert on the middle east but, frankly, a very patriotic american who, after 9/11 when answered kind of disappeared for seven years, working for uncle sam in northern virginia doing important sorts of work. so we've been friends for a long time, but his knowledge is remarkable. i've had to say they always an expert somebody from out of town. so i just want to acknowledge, i'm sitting at this table and i'm talking to congressman berkley who is a member of the house foreign relations committee -- [applause] and the middle east

subcommittee. and when you get face time with someone with that level of exposure back in washington, it's something to be treasured. the dr. burgess came back from iran two days ago, they want to talk to someone about iran come he's the person to talk to. and, finally, professor ted wrote a book, classic book called why men rebel, which i read as a graduate student. we're the same age. it's just that i was dumb and didn't get into graduate school until i was old. and if you want to understand things like the iranian revolution you read books as did i like why -- you're really living in a remarkably interesting community as i kind of suspected. and so this is just one voice but it certainly, it's only a different one. okay. let me, i want to do a little sort of contextual talking about iran do and what i want to do first of all is seen setting to try and understand how did we

get to the task where we're at today. i going to do it was in tehran dissipating during a renewed revolution. so i actually was there i didn't participate but i witnessed the iranian revolution from its beginnings until the return of ayatollah money. so i was there and i saw -- ayatollah khamenei. this was 35 years ago and it was a revolution against the shah of iran who really accomplished a remarkable achievement as he got the vast majority of the people in his country to hate him. i mean, that's really to get iran is to agree on anything is not easy last night but this succeeded brilliantly. and i'm saying this, it's actually quite unfortunate and sad because he had extraordinary resources available to them. and he flirted them away. i could spend the whole time

telling you how they did that but we don't have time to do it today. trust me. this guy just, you know, he had a remarkable opportunity. he was ill with cancer. he was having chemotherapy. so there all sorts of explanations but it's unfortunate. whvaidya iranian's not like us? there's sort of kind of an inherent oxymoron. many people will say iran is the most pro-american country in the united states in what they mean by that i is that certain not te government of iran which is not. but the average iranian on the street. i live in the second largest concentration of iranian's in the world outside of iran. i go to iran that all the time but regularly since the revolution. and it's really amazing, given the sort of high level distort between two governments. i would say joe sixpack but bitterness expect in iran.

the average person in the street actually likes the united states. they like american culture. they like basketball. sort of normal sorts of stuff to get everywhere. but having said that, again, you're not going to love it but am just going to tell you how iranian's thing, not that i agree with it or i subscribe to these use but you need to understand how we look from within iran. because i think it's important to first of all it is believed that we support the curatorships across the middle east. and, indeed, one could argue that by supporting saudi arabia or egypt under mubarak, there were lots of examples, this is certainly the case. second of all we supported iraq in its attack on iran. after the iranian revolution iraq attacked iran. vista that rings was a traumatic event from which iran has never

recovered. they ascribe to what responsibility of this war. our hands on on this on a completely clean either. there's a brief period of time in which lots of my colleagues were trekking off to baghdad but we were selling weapons to the iraqis. the same regime that we are with her was the regime that we were supporting, and it was a horrible regime, you know, up there with the assad regime in three. again, this was the iranian's talking. on the united states and what iranian's belief is that the united states favors the jewish state over muslim states, states that are populated primarily by muslims. it may not agree coming may not be true but this is the perception in iran. this is what iranian's belief. in fact, after the revolution he took the israeli embassy in transit and they gave it to the plo. they celebrate jerusalem day in

and to get to the rain is believed we as a country favor the jewish state over the muzzle state and, therefore, muslim states therefore we are anti-islam and the there are all sorts of arguments against the. we have muslim chaplains in the american military. we should be part of the organization of islamic countries because the u.s. has a lot of muslims. there was some congressmen sworn in on the koran. okay. [inaudible] >> this is why you need congress people -- really, i'm quite serious. so this is what the iranians believe, that we don't like muslims. and they will read about the story of a sikh guy in a gas station of murder in arizona for some who thought it was muslim. you take something and you wildly exaggerated and it becomes truth. fourth come we're trying to strangle iran economically. we are. we have reasons to do it. economic sanctions, and iran is

indeed a strength of the day rain is regarded this more as an emotional type of strength rather than one that's the result of geopolitics. if the u.s. is trying to expel iran from the communications. we are. that u.s. policy and there's a reason for it. iran's regard is more emotional and a range believe that iran is a great nation, an ancient nation with global interests and they deeply resent what they think we are trying to do. now, 65% of the population of iran is under the age of 35. this is all they knew. they grew up with this. this is the islamist republic, that's it. that's all they know and there are things about they don't like and so forth. but at the end of the day this is part of what makes iran iran come and it certainly is not going to change. they have been inherited. we have partnered with our

narrative? one, they took over our embassy. they did. every international norm. we've all seen our ago. great movie. really, really an accurate but still great. i loved it. i've seen it twice. i know how inaccurate it was but i still liked it. it is sort of shorthand for taking over -- ted koppel companies are old enough. second of all the iranian's support terrorist and extremist groups. that absolutely do. it was the attack on the jewish community center in buenos aires which is still being investigated. support for hezbollah, there was an attempted assassination on the saudi ambassador to the united states in washington. these are things that iran has been. 89 the holocaust. i was invited, believe it or not is jewish kid from massachusetts which is why was from

originally, i was invited to a meeting in tehran that the holocaust didn't happen. i couldn't make it. i had a conflict. but indeed there are people that do deny the holocaust. includes with ignorance of modern history. they threaten to destroy israel. the united states supports israel because the american people wish to support israel. it's not because a million jews are tricking americans into doing it. american policy. i used to live in texas. you go to these mega churches. this is an american issue. it's not something an american jewish issue. it's an american issue. we are the great satan. they are the axis of evil. member the axis of evil? they are the axis of evil, we

are the great satan. all right, so there are competing narratives, both worked in terms of mobilizing negative energy. they have real resilience in both countries. what's going to happen? okay, what do we know? this is the one that i think is the most important. what do we know about iran? decent people are working, i'm reading things about iran written by my learned colleagues all over the united states, which stands me because there's this sort of certainty with which they tell us about iran and one another which is divided by reality. nobody really understands what's going on in iran. it is impossible, the political system in iran is intentionally designed so that it is okay, it is obscure. people really don't know. iranian's don't know what's going on.

very smart iranians who are politically connected don't know. that's and the nature of the system. part of it is they want to avoid what happened to the shah. they want to create a political system in which is very, very difficult to over rule the current political order. part of it is the uncertainty that comes in the wake of a revolution. nobody wants to make a decision. nobody wants to be at risk. nobody wants to take a chance. and nature of that system is such that it's really not clear how does it work. it's murkiness, as i read the stuff that all my -- part of these i don't do this as much as i used to because i feel like helen keller. there's so much that's not evident to us. it's not clear. we so lack information. north korea is sort of the gold standard of ignorance, but iran is not far behind in terms of the iranian system.

so i read endlessly and i get frustrated. tv, i can't even do. although there's a story on cnn this point that the iranian soccer team has an american assistant coach. that's kind of interesting. i didn't know about that. who are the key political actors in iran? the one you about all the time is the supreme leader. and as supreme leader is many things, one of which he is not come is he is not supreme. he is sort of the political actor part excellent but he is a political actor. is not some autocratic who snaps his finger and things happen. is problem, and it's going to continue to get worse is he is not ayatollah khamenei who was only one in five and one khomeini pass missing is sort of unique role that khomeini occupied is not imminently transferable to somebody else. so the supreme leader presides over the islamic republic. is not only the spiritual leader

but also the political leader. but he needs to engage in politicking just the way everybody else does. he really needs to get political interest in iran to support him. he needs to work with them. and certainly he's very, very influential. but he's not the only game in town. and, indeed, it's a challenge. second of all was the religious sector. mullahs are the religious sectors, extremely diverse. not that they all agree. there is race diversity and differences of view within the religious sector, with in the religious sector. some are extremely conservative and orthodox and ignorant and so that are actually very enlightened and they did it. they did it, but they are working within a very difficult system. the third is the irgc which is the revolutionary guard. the revolutionary guard is not

only a military organization, parallel to the traditional military, far more importantly is also an economic entity that is sort of complicated dish but compared to the people's liberation army in china. business interests are extraordinary. they are very, very wealthy. they built khomeini in airport in iran after a battle with another group that wanted to build the airport and they lost. they didn't have as many games. so the irgc is again another political entity, which is very, very influential. none of them are dominant. but all of them are important. you can't really discount any of them. the part about the iranian politics which is so fascinating which none of us have access to is these people have spent a lot of time with one another. they drink tea. baby poetry. they do politics, if you will.

and it's a constant series of negotiations, deliberations, horsetrading and politicking. which is again how iranian politics always work. it worked this way under the shah. it works this way under the shah that there were groups of people who would go to school together or would be in a similar industry. and it's sort of interesting the way we have our interest to i'm sure congress you had other congress -- your group, the people that you work with, and in the good old days, five or six is ago they could even be of the opposite party and you would do a deal. is a book coming out on tip o'neill's relationship with ronald reagan. very, very interesting. they used to do business all the time. iran operates that way. this idea that there's one source and they're behind everything, that's simply wrong.

okay, iran is having -- i'm doing this quickly and forgive me but there's a lot to cover and i want to of out time for question. it was the khomeini era which is very special because khomeini they said there was pretty much what he wanted to do. khomeini was with interesting because if we were sitting in idaho, in turn 60 for the revolution and some secret conficker most of the people in this room would have supported khomeini. the reason we would have supported him is because not because we like him because we didn't like the shah coming people certainly like me, the sort of new diverse -- snooty professor. he's this old guy come sort of ignorant cleric. he's got the people who we were using to get rid of the shah and this guy will become. they are now sitting in beverly hills drinking tea wondering what went wrong. at khomeini was much my dear opponent and much wider and

smarter, you know, focused in any of them thought. but the khomeini era was kind of the most difficult, one of the most difficult times because the war with iraq, the invasion of iraq, the invasion of iran by a rack which traumatized the iranian people. you've heard of the cemetery and tehran where those fountains shooting up red water to symbolize the blood that was shed. this really was sort of a 9/11 equivalent to the iranians. it deeply, deeply affected the people of iran. and it still does today. ultimately, there was an elected president. he was this liberal, sort of guy that we thought we could do business with. he was the rouhani if you will of his age. and nothing much came of it. nothing much came of it. all my colleagues were swinging from the chandeliers, a wonderful opportunity. we will make a deal.

the deal never got made. why did nick it made? part of it was because he could not deliver iran and part of it i think was the time wasn't right. so he is sort of synonymous with the form, the fact that it wasn't successful doesn't mean there is no room for reform. it's and the means it was unsuccessful. then there was a hardy perennial, everybody's favorite, the ahmadinejad run. this guy had a vision communism vision of the bad guy. and he never failed, he never failed to deliver i used to call in israel's secret weapon. the israelis must have loved and because this guy was so uncontrollable, was so off the charts that in essence osha to do was sit there and just watch iran. it was very easy to sort of do with iran, to sort of expel iran from the world community and to sanction it because ahmadinejad was just so inattentive to these

issues. he was very much concerned with the voters, his domestic constituency and iran. it wasn't only u.s. sanctions to destroy the economy. a lot of it was what ahmadinejad himself was doing. ridiculous concessions and subsidies and other sorts of things and ahmadinejad innocent may have been a necessary evil, because he may have keyed up iran for the rouhani era in which you we are present with an opportunity for negotiation, which is further, is made further urgent by the development of the iranian nuclear program, which upsets anybody, as well it should. the idea of a weaponize iran and iran having nuclear weapons appeals to nobody.

i mean, it really is not something that will benefit the world. and, frankly, i don't believe it will benefit iran. now, the problem with iran, not the problem, the challenge with iran, iran is not a country is going to which you can bully but it's and it doesn't work that way. if you look at what iran has been at the olympics, wrestling and weightlifting. really, i'm serious. this is a country where it's very, very nationalistic, a very strong sense of self. when you go to iran which i'm sure you all will, at some point your host will take you to something called -- it's a house of strength. it's when people kind of get synchronized weightlifting. it's actually very, very interesting. the point i'm making, this is not a country that gives him

well to bowling. they have a very strong sense of himself. they're very naturalistic. is sort of a natural -- marshall quality and it simply doesn't work. what was so interesting about the rouhani election is that yet again and opportunity for some type of peaceful resolution of our differences with iran emerging. and again, i am skeptical because i'm always skeptical. i always say that we middle east specialists are kind of the oncologist of aerial studies but invariably we are wrong and we can do anything and we have no good news. but having said that, i think -- i mean this, the stakes are so high, they are so important that i think that i certainly supported president obama's attempt to meet rouhani's

initiative in the spirit in which we would like to believe it's been given. there are no guarantees. there are no guarantees. but having said that, the planet earth is less of a place with iran in a box, with iran in the box. we really do need to try and find a way without giving away the farm the way we did in syria i might add, but to try to find accommodation with iran. maybe it won't work. the irony about this, sort of unusual characteristics is that the rouhani initiative to the u.s. and president obama's response has driven iran and saudi arabia into the same corner. that's quite an achievement, both iran and -- rather israel and saudi arabia are very, very uncomfortable with the possibility of these ongoing negotiations with iran.

some israelis, you can never say the israelis. it's too interesting, too diverse to be the israelis. what some israelis believe, and probably many more saudis belief, is that the iranians are doing this to buy time. they are not sincere. they don't mean it. rouhani will not be able to deliver, and while we are -- in other words, they believe that iran will do what i believe assad is to the chemical weapons program. you know, innocents it except that accusation about syria, it certainly deserves to be considered about iran. it is my view, my personal view the risk is certainly worth taking. and, indeed, if we are right, the big beneficiaries are likely to be both israel and saudi arabia who will be not under the sword of some sort of iranian nuclear program. what if i'm wrong? that's a question, if you are

shlomo sixpacks sitting in tel aviv or in riyadh, you know, they can very easily come easy for green to say living in los angeles, we get nuked, you know, he won't even let us stay in his guestroom. i understand that. i really do, but i also do believe in our form of government. i have some measure of trust in our elected officials, maybe more than angela merkel does or others, and this is a series issue the united states government has been deeply, deeply involved in from day one. i think if iran is serious or unserious it will be revealed relatively quickly. the first seven negotiations in geneva went very well. wendy sherman who was leaving our negotiating team didn't provide any details. the iranians appeared showed up with a very detailed powerpoint

presentation. it was not ahmadinejad punning around. they actually showed up with some serious suggestions, everybody watch away from the meeting feeling this was time well spent. in both countries, this again is what's so interesting, there are going to be masers in both countries. they are certainly people in congress who will say, aha, see, the sanctions are working. it's squeezed iran into compliance, let's ratchet up the sanctions. we've got them on the ropes. they are on the run. let's elevate the sanction more. wendy sherman, against the person from the state department who is overseeing the negotiations, said that she does not believe it would be helpful to increase the sanctions now. this is after irritating the iranians by which he said the duplicity as part of their dna. the iranians didn't like that. so there's something for everybody.

but if you believe that the nuclear issue is important i don't think it's the only issue. where it's going to get sticky is on levels of enrichment, that iran believes it has the right to enrich plutonium for peaceful uses. the level of enrichment is very, very significant. him we and the israelis and the saudis and others are afraid of is that iran will be so close that they can enrich their very quickly and weaponize. and again i would not dismiss that. i think this is too serious to solicit it's not a possibility. it's got to be factored into the thinking, but the obama administration and the department say, believe that they have this, yo you know, thy understand and have it under control. each country has its own tea party. i mean, the iranians invented drinking tea. there are certainly naysayers in

iran who will make this very, very difficult, just as there are naysayers in the united states to argue that we are being called, being tricked, this is not going to work. so the challenge for obama and rouhani is a need to sell not only one another, they need to sell their own people. and again, the obama administration has had such challenges in the middle east that one of its -- one of the issues it's going to have to contend with is its credibility on middle east issues. these issues are all related. we were having a little discussion, and i purposely stayed out of it, does the palestine issue matter, and at the end of the day, the symbolism of the palestine issue matters a lot. the palestine issue is resolved tomorrow, we would not be returned when clement and not worry about anything ever again. but having said that if the

palestine issue is resolved, satisfactory in a way that promotes the israeli national security and gives the palestinians their own rights, it gives one reason to dislike and distrust, one reason to dislike and distrust this in the middle east will go away. there's a whole list of other to their having to do with egypt and so on and so forth. but the palestine issue does matter. you need to understand how does it matter, what's the nature of the matter and? and their i think that we need to be realistic. so all of these issues are related, and president obama has all sorts of domestic issues, you know, obamacare and the endless list of things. so the question is, if he is able to make a deal with the iranians, which satisfies him and satisfies secretary of state kerry, will even be able to sell this deal to the american people and their elected representatives in congress? i think it's a real

consideration, and the same consideration exists in a rented it sort of a two-stage challenge. wanted to make a deal with one another, the other is to get your camps to accept the deals. the supreme leader commented on rouhani's trip to new york. it went very well but there was some imperfections and what the supreme leader was allegedly criticizing was the phone call between rouhani and obama. the guys can have a phone call and it goes to that level. it shows you how difficult it is to make a deal. let me and by advocating extraordinary humility when it comes to understanding iran. the data is just not there. we are really stumbling around in the dark and trying to make sense of things with very, very fragmentary information. and things changed a lot. so these are all my personal views.

the longer a study iran, the longer i think i should probably been a switzerland specialist or something. because the longer i do it the more, i always and discovering new nuances and new complications, and just things that i hadn't figured. the record of middle east specialist thomas i'm looking at the professor, the real deal of serious political scientist, our record is one of uniform failure. you name it, we failed to predict it. it's an extraordinary record. i say don't come to las vegas with people like me. that's normally what i say, but we really come we didn't predict the arab spring. i mean, you name it, we didn't get it right. so be very aware of experts from out of town or even intend to this is not for the faint of heart. so let me stop with that. i would be delighted to have questions or contrasting views. yes, sir.

[inaudible] >> did everybody here the question? this gentleman was saying speak for the purposes of c-span taping, we need every question to be made from this microphone in the center of the room, please. >> the question is, if we make this deal you spoke of with the islamic republic, are we not selling a resident six back down the river? >> i don't think, it depends on what the deal looks like. and i think that the thing that we as americans, and iranians in the u.s., some of them need to realize as -- the islamic republic is here to stay. it's a country that was born out of revolution, something we should understand. ..

[inaudible] >> there is one right here. okay. there is one aspect of iran's role in the middle east that you might want to touch upon given our limited time to do so much.

but this is critical in understanding what is going on in the arab world which is air on tv co. i ran's role as the emerging government of the global community. and this is why they are getting the saudi's to react the way they do. the saudis are reacting the way they do because they are concerned that iran is going to nuke them and because of the rise of iran as the major voice in the muslim world which traditionally has gone to the arabs and saudi arabia and the place where islam began and where the holy places are so it is a direct challenge to the saudi role in the world. but that also speaks to how iran sees its role not just in the middle east but elsewhere. so i wonder what your comments on that art. >> is a very important and good question. thank you for raising that.

i think there are divergent views in iran of what the world role is. the revolution really if you think about it has failed. the iranian revolution was meant to sponsor a series of islamic revolutions around the world. it was supposed to be the model for muslims to sort of throw off the oppression. and rather than the various groups around the world, no country has done the way of air on tv co. iran as creating islamic republics. having said that, it is absolutely imperative and that is one that is not going to go right. so we can laugh at saudi arabia at the time they are letting women drive cars -- that is a remarkable achievement in the 21st century -- we can try to make a deal with iran, and at

the end of the day i go to saudi arabia a lot. the saudis do not have a lot of alternatives. they are not going to start sending their kids to the university in beijing. they are sort of stuck with us and we are stuck with them and so in the best sense of the world. but traditionally, we have made changes in the middle east. i think that ultimately -- in a perfect world where we would have relationships with all major polls in the middle east. with iran, with the sunni arabs and certainly the israelis and even with turkey which i think of as a middle eastern state. but what you are talking about is not going to -- it's very important. the question is how will that play in terms of broad opportunities for economic development and integration and into the world and so forth. i mean, these are countries that are evolving. what we haven't talked about at all is the arab spring. this is a region that is

undergoing extraordinary changes and your question highlights one of the most important areas of instability but not the only one. let's make the question is brief as possible. >> for that i apologize. you pointed out how difficult it is for us to predict what is going to happen. don't you think that we are held by that by starting history in 1979 rather than in 1953 or 1952 when they got together and overthrew the government. you didn't mention anything about that. another thing that you talked about the danger of iran having nuclear weapons. what about the danger of israel having nuclear weapons or the united states having nuclear weapons. we are the only ones that have

actually purposely killed people with a nuclear weapon. and i wonder if you can look into the future and see what's going to happen when china becomes the dominant country in the world that takes over from the united states. how do you think that will affect iran and israel which seems totally oblivious to the fact that this is going to happen? >> i am a simple guy and i don't disagree with particularly 1953 which is part of the iranian narrative. one of the reasons they don't like us is because we brought the shah back. what are we going to do? i'm not sure what we can do about it.

>> we want to talk about people that are not here. let's talk real issue is where we can have an impact in at the end of the day if you are too ambitious to get nothing done. i guess my staff the f. word lecture and its focus. let's pick our issues and to do it. if we can solve the palestine issue there are so many ifs. the world will be a better place if we are realistic in our ambitions. and that is the f. word. >> i have loved your presentation. it was an informative and a charming and most enjoyable to listen to and the only thing i liked better was our conversation around a table which was a lot of fun as well.

i don't think anybody in this room would mistake me for being a t. party person. quite the contrary. but i come down on the side of those that think that a deal with iran writes abou writenow n impossibility and i'm going to tell you why. i may not even talk about that, but i was part of the original cosponsors of the iranian sanctions bill, both of them come and work very closely with the europeans to ensure that they voted for sanctions in the eu and at the united nations so this is something i've been involved with for quite a while. but, the reason that rouhani is reaching out to the united states and the europeans is because the sanctions are working. we are bringing their economy to its knees and im of the mind that if we start loosening up those sanctions and granting

concessions before they agreed to end their nuclear ambitions and i do not believe for a minute they are attempting to use nuclear for peaceful purposes, there is only one reason that they are working so hard at spending so much money to acquire enough material to make a nuclear bomb. it's my understanding from the latest intelligence information that they are would be a month of having enough material to impact make one bomb and i think that would be very dangerous for us to lift the sanctions now after all the time and sacrifice and the efforts on the part of the united states and the european lift those sanctions work. the way they are going to work is to not make it worse right now which i am of the mind it

should but let's leave them in place until the iranians come back and come over to our way of thinking and actually agree to and the nuclear ambition and i find it extraordinary in this day and age that rouhani is considered a moderate when he has been the advisor and the right-hand man of the supreme leader. in addition to that, when asked to -- mahmoud ahmadinejad was a total lunatic and israel should be wiped off the map and it was a quite eerie nuclear capability to do exactly that or so he said. and of course, was a holocaust denier. so now they ask the same question to the holocaust occurred and he said i'm not a historian and everyone applauded him as being a great moderate. to me that is not being a great moderate. >> the question? >> the question is -- [laughter] >> why would you possibly think

that lifting the sanctions now would be help with the iranians given their history and their proclivity. >> i didn't say that we should lift the sanctions now. wendy sherman said they shouldn't be increased. i don't think we should let them now but where you will hate me as ipv -- while not hate but you will disagree with me in fact believe they should signal a willingness to consider lifting the sanctions in ways that will satisfy your view which is important. you represent an important segment of opinion. i don't fully agree but i get it. i hope you didn't think i was calling you a t. party or -- tea partier. it will have to hold that view and it's going to be difficult. succumb to the question is how

can he sort of addressed the sanctions issue in a way that will have an impact on iran while at the same time being able to persuade people that hold your view with a respectable important to you that you are being met. i've heard so many statistics about when i ran -- air iran which are wildly different and that's part of why i am lamenting. you can say how can you afford to take a risk if there is a 1% possibility how can you do it? you are right but the more desperate they become the more likely they are to feel painted into a corner to do something. >> you just answered the

question i was going to put to you yes or no and very briefly, can the iranians be forced to give up their nuclear option, let's call it that because that's what it is, any level of sanctions that the world will agree to impose beyond where we are today? >> it's not only that. they have to be willing to commit t very "-end-quotes if inspections, intrusive inspections. there is a way around that that is an infringement on their sovereignty and other things. the bar is going to be pretty high for them and i'm not sure if they are going to meet it so this is not a bad discussion because it's not like i'm right -- that is what i'm very mindful of and history kind of favors you more than me. certainly recent history which is worrisome that it is what it

is. >> i have a twofold question first on the increasing persecution is the average person feel about that and also in prison in evansville is that also on the mind and the heart of the people and how do they feel? >> of the situation of christian minorities across the middle east is not good. the situation in egypt whose terrible. in terms of iran being a religious minority isn't -- it's not only christians, it is jewish and they are at the top of being discriminated against and christians have had issues, jews have had issues, tribal

groups -- persians or any minority group in iran believe it or not there are all of these tribal and other national and linguistic groups so this is not a country that has shown great respect for diversity or pluralism so it's a very important question and the news is not good. in terms of the person being imprisoned, we don't know. >> there might be another elephant in the room that might be of concern. would you please comment on the interaction between iran and iraq and the impact on what you're discussing? >> that is a good question. the relationship between iran and iraq. the situation in iraq is deteriorating. iran genuinely believes that it has an interest in iraq which it does and it is a neighboring

country. to go back to the question that paul was asking, they have a sort of complex with iraq. of the two holy cities are of iraq and iran want a table beneath the seat at the table and the table is very unsteady. iraq isn' isn't out of the woodd we are not on the same side. afghanistan believe it or not there was a time that we collaborated pretty effectively but these things were fleeting and they are not forever so you are exactly right. >> i would like to talk about a domestic economic.

we talk about sanctions and how that affects them and their economy but i was wondering what you think of how severe are some of their own domestic policies and recovery from that particularly the highly educated yet severely underemployed which i'm sure we cannot imagine here young population under 35-years-old is that going to involve privatizing the maximum amount of the industry? >> it looks worse than it should look because it has a very sophisticated business sector and highly educated people, very good labor force and a tradition of being an economically very healthy country and petroleum producers which we often forget. if they continue on this track we keep the sanctions which under certain circumstances will

be no choice and we have to do it. i'm not sure that rouhani would have done this if the economy were healthier but it's not and he did. the question is there a deal to be made, which does jury is still out on that. the economic recovery is absolutely possible in iran. absolutely. but the right circumstances needed to be in place. and unemployment, the youth bulge, all of these things, the environment is a terrible issue. if you've been to tehran likely it's like mexico city, it's absolutely foul. water shortage, there are endless numbers of problems which are not being dealt with because they don't have the will or the resources were both. >> we have been talking about this as if it were strictly a middle east issue. but about their role in particularly northern africa and closer to home of hezbollah and

central and south america? >> i mentioned above bombing of the community and there is no doubt. is anybody watching homeland? i can't say anything without spoiling. iran is involved in all sorts of things globally and this was the center of a sort of global shia political religious-based inspired political movement and it's not constructive. but having said that if we remain on the course it isn't going to get better. the question is if they pull back on this stuff if we reach an accord and it will be in their interest. they don't do this because they are monetizing it, these are desperation moves by a country dealing with a failed revolution

so you're absolutely right this is not inevitable and it doesn't have to be forever. it would help if we were more attentive to latin america as well and the degree to which the united states takes latin america for granted. the caribbean and all sorts of places. >> i have a question and a statement. first my question is who talked about iran. whatever they do in iraq but also they are taking over turkey, one of the biggest allies and as we call them they are the right of nato. last week they passed a law that you cannot sell alcohol in the shops and you cannot sell in any

restaurant anymore and between 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m., selling alcohol is banned. >> it sounds like texas by the way. >> that's okay, texas can do that but turkey is a secular country and today the 29th of october is a day they really celebrate that because they believe they are secular. but that is my question is what is your opinion with the involvement of the turk's and for the first time one more time they are together and taking control of the middle east. what is your opinion and the statement was the congresswoman was absolutely right because i

am half persian, i was born in iran. i left very young and i did see all of them this summer and all of them even though they are very heard from the section it is the only way to bring who they are. >> i don't think turkey needs any help from iran. turkey is a very big and independent country. there is a movement towards islamization. turkey mistakenly wanted to join for years and years and years which never made sense to me. the only country in the world that is central asian and european. they should leverage all three of those rather than going in the start action that benefits nobody. so i don't think that it's a particularly significant actor.

they aren't going to listen to them and they don't need help. the idea that they are together again i don't see turkey coordinating its policies with iran. it's a different country with different expectations but what it does show is if iran is the only good news coming out of the middle east what does that say about the middle east? >> there is one issue where they come together that's where they help each other to keep curbing the nationalism and this would become even more of an issue because if they set up an autonomous zone in northeast syria and of course in combination with northern iraq which brings me to a question

from our former president of the world affairs council in his question has to do with iran's roll. >> it's always bizarre because if iran is all about islam and the shia to support the outside family is the antithesis of everything that the islamic republic stands for which is an aggressively minority, secular, nonreligious political order that gave to the era of the world but a value by the value s very brilliant. but if it's that the iranians as completely undermined by its relationship with.

and then taking into congress making a deal with russia and basically they should send the united states government a thank you note for biting at another six months or a year or two years or whatever it is. my deal with iran and you would know better than i do, i always felt about the role in this area and the influence in lebanon and a serious or somewhat exaggerated i think that they were striving to be influential that of the lebanese and thus urea and are not willing to be dominated by the iranians said it was a marriage of which they collaborated that i never got the feeling that iran was pushing the buttons in tehran. but it doesn't change the fact that their involvement in both places is not constructive and it's very, very serious.

>> is totally dependent as a supplier of weaponry and dependent on this urea as the channel through which they arrived. so this whole setup very critical to the survival of hezbollah and lebanon and it is their power in the country so it is very critical in that respect. >> i agree with that. >> the russian media portrays as a friend or just an ally. how do the iranians feel? do they take russia seriously or what is their sense of russia?

>> everybody sort of takes russia seriously and there were long historical relations between iran and russia. the father was a member of military brigade but i think that russia is looking for a role in the middle east. they understand that russia might be a sort of useful counterpoint to the u.s. and to those forces that are marshaled against it but it's not to develop a nuclear weapons capability. russia is concerned about the political-based activity along its southern border to central asia so they will tolerate certain behavior but probably not too much and the iranians i don't think i've expectations of russia nor should they.

>> i would add to that and ask you to comment as far as iran is concerned, russia is a rival on the oil and gas export front far more critical is the budding relationship with china and china is becoming very aggressive in its purchase of natural resources and establishing all sorts of channels to build on for the future. india also be rides a lot of its oil imports and has been affected by the sanctions and is tired of them and try being in finding ways of getting around the sanctions. so we should not say that iran is isolated when it comes to the sanctions. in fact there is a rising number of emerging powers that find it in their interest to work with

iran and get around the sanctions so that is also part of the picture. >> any more questions. >> [inaudible] for the interest of the rest of the audience the question is whether there are other intermediaries that could work with iran other than the united states and germany. >> it's not a bilateral u.s. and iran. there were a number of other powers. at the end of the day we don't need media is. the countries need to decide to make a deal and once they do it will happen because the foreign

minister got his phd at the university of denver which is where condoleezza got her phd. so it's simply the ability of these countries. but with paul mentioned and others is all of these other collateral issues which d. i let her lives as global because there were all of these activities elsewhere which really impinge on our ability to make a deal, there is and us. >> you've made a great contribution to our understanding of how complex the picture is in filling in some of the blanks. i know it would take a week to fill in all of the blanks that this was extremely useful. thank you for coming out and for having me. i appreciate it. [applause]

>> news now from capitol hill. the house has passed a plan that would allow insurance companies to continue selling policies that do not comply with the health care law. the final tally was 262-157 with 39 democrats supporting the republican bill. the "washington post" writes that the proposal would allow more americans to keep their current health plans while significantly weakening the affordable care act. the plan would make good on president obama's broken promise of allowing americans to continue with the current health coverage if they wish. the president is meeting with insurance company executives getting underway about now at the white house, the associated press writes president barack obama trying to rescue as much criticiz h