your ray with the muslim community in particular and other groups of color. moving forward, do we see any protections against this type of profiling with surveillance through the nsa but with other types of surveillance in general? i mean, the president mentioned it very, very briefly. again, do we see any of these protections moving forward? >> okay. had one over here. >> thomas stevenson, also a student, george washington university. so would the nsa or would cyber command take over the security of our armed forces instead of, like, if the nsa was removed from military operations? >> okay. anybody else before we close the question floor? all right. ian, a brief wrap-up from each of y'all. >> so a specific answer to the

last question. the three roles of u.s. cybercom, one is specifically to look after the security of dod networks, the other two being to support commanders and the third -- which is in some ways the most difficult and challenging -- is to defend the nation and how that engages. so cybercom has that responsibility, i think, the challenge if it were to arise would be a lot of the intelligence that cyber command needs to do its work comes from the nsa side, and splitting the two out would be highly inefficient. that inefficiency may be worthwhile in the long run, but in the short term i think the judgment is the benefits are not, do not justify that inefficiency. general sort of wrap-up comment, i think what has not been

commented on too much, but is also worth getting on the record is, one, the interesting aspect of this speech is president obama directly confronting the national aspects of this which haven't been part of the administration's presentation to date. so when you have a dni sitting in front of congress saying this is only affecting american citizens, however, factually accurate that might be, over six billion people around the world today -- and, actually, i'm not one of those. i think the way in which the president came out and directly confronted these issues is helpful to sort of taking this forward. >> yeah. so on the question of profiling, one of the principles that the presidential policy directive has made explicit and made

universal is that the united states shall not collect signals intelligence for disadvantaging persons based on their ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation or religion. and i think that along with many of the other things here i go to the point that ian made. we have here the president speaking out on these issues. when this, you know, when the snowden disclosures came up, the president said he wanted to have a national and a global conversation about sr. vail lance -- surveillance and about privacy. it's a conversation that he wanted to be very engaged in, and i think that's reflected in the choice of a review board, people who are very trusted by the president and who use their trusted position boldly. and he and he has not endorsed l

of those recommendations, but he's certainly taken them aboard, onboard. he has certainly engaged in a vigorous way in that conversation, and i hope that that can be a tipping point to move forward in some very substantive ways on the broad set of issues that we have here. >> well, as i said at the beginning, one of the big contributions the president's made here today is in taking away this image of the out-of-control, rogue national security agency, and i think that's a very important step. there are two things i'm looking towards seeing next. one is, what happens when there is another terrorist incident in the united states? a repeat of boston or something like that? as ben rightly puts out, the president acknowledged that. and i think he's acutely aware of in this. he has been very lucky for five years, very lucky. his luck isn't going to go on

forever and ever, and our luck collectively isn't going to go on forever and ever. will there then be questions why are we wasting time going to courts when we know there are terrorists in the united states? that is a matter of time. the other thing that i'm going to be looking for is what's the next shoe to drop from the edward snowden apparatus. what are we going to hear from his network of supporters? in the course of his revelations so far, there's been a pattern of orchestration that has been quite interesting. you know, you get a leak about germany just when we're about to go to germany. you get a leak about brazil when the brazilian is just about to come here. i think he may have tried yesterday to get a similar effect, i don't think he got much of a bounce, we'll see. and the other question is it really edward snowden who's doing this, or is there a larger ap rat cuts? -- apparatus?

i know that many people in the intelligence community who are looking at this issue now no longer regard edward snowden as a thief or a traitor or those things, they regard him as a martyr who's gone other to another foreign intelligence agency. that's a very interesting question which we don't have a very good handle on. but let's see what comes next out of moscow. >> so i very much agree that a lot of the next few months will be conditioned by additional disclosures. have we reached the point where each additional disclosure has less and less impact on the debate in which case i think you could really imagine this presidential speech combined with a certain apathy in congress or lethargy in congress beginning to be the sort of tail

end of this set of scandals or controversies. the other possibility is that the disclosures continue, and they maintain a certain fevered pitch in large segments of both conservative and liberal bases that really condition the congressional politics and keep them alive in a way that is, can be very unpredictable and very i think sort of dangerous. if what you're trying to do is bring stability to our understanding of what authorities will and won't exist, should and shouldn't exist and what should be written in law, what should be policy, what should be fluid and what should be fixed.

the, finally, and i will close here, you know, the other big factor is the fact that the patriot act authorities, including section 215, do sunset in a little less than 18 months. and so in the short term, if congress doesn't do something, what happens is that the president maintains all the authority that he has, including vis-a-vis 215, subject to whatever additional constraints he puts on himself, some of which he did today. but in the longer term, and the longer term isn't really that long, that default switches. and if congress doesn't do something, the 215 authority actually goes away in, i believe, may of 2015. and so one of the questions, and i think we'll leave it here, is do the politics settle enough that you could have a

congressional enactment that says this is the portion of this program that we will endorse beyond may of 2015, and does the review group recommendation as articulated by the president today, embraced sort of by the president today, provide a formula for that longer-term stability or not? picture strikes me as very different if you think that recommendation and the president's discussion of it today provides a basis for settlement of that issue than the you believe it doesn't. thank you very much for coming. and come back. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[applause] >> new jersey republican governor chris christie is being inaugurated for the second time today. ceremonies got underway at about 11:30. he was sworn in at noon today, and you can see live coverage of his inaugural speech right now on our companion network, c-span. we also invite your participation, your remarks about chris christie via social media on facebook and twitter, c-span chat. well, wintry weather all over the east coast, and here in washington you can see snow falling right now. we're expecting up to 9 inches here. the house and senate held brief pro forma sessions earlier today. in political news this afternoon, the associated press reporting that republican senator david vitter will run for louisiana governor next year.

in an e-mail to reporters, he said: i believe i can have a bigger impact addressing the unique challenges we face in louisiana. the senator sent the e-mail obtained by the associated press. governor bobby jindal is term limited, so the race is wide open. senator vitter can run without forfeiting his current position in the u.s. senate which isn't up for re-election until 2016. now, because of the wintry weather, a lot of the programs we were planning to bring to you today got canceled. one that was not was a discussion this morning on security at winter olympics in sochi, russia. here's a portion. >> one, and you've heard a lot of discussion of in this the russian press recently in terms of capacity of the security services. they're essentially structured differently from the way that security services in the west are structured. their main goal is regime security rather than public

security, let's say. and, obviously, with a high profile, very politically significant event like to olympics, those two things are connected. but nevertheless, i think the goal of the security state that putin presides over and, indeed, out of which putin himself came is very much directed more at inflating the regime from pressures coming from outside rather than it is towards securing the public in general. and i think one of the challenges that that apparatus faces in the context of to olympics is trying to make that pivot to do more of a public security role precisely because of the political importance that it has. and i don't know about the capacity to do that. the second point that i would just emphasize here, and this is something that we haven't talked about, but i think it's really important in a lot of contexts related to the olympics is corruption. the discussion in russia has a lot of, in the leadup to the

games has really focused on this element, on the amount of money that's been misappropriated, misplaced, gone into dodgy contracts and offshore bank accounts. by almost all accounts, these are going to be the most expensive olympic games ever, upwards of $50 billion. as much of a third of that may have been just simply embezzled or stolen. what does this all have to do with security? well, i think operationally the security services can be supremely effective, but they're only in the macrosense as effective as their weakest link. and in a lot of cases, the weakest link is corruption. if you think about some of the successful attacks that have been carried out in russia over the last decade or so, one that really, is really striking, i guess, is the when two female chechnyan suicide bombers blew up a russian aircraft in about,

i want to say 2007 or so, i don't remember exact -- >> 2004. >> 2004, okay. yeah, okay. and essentially what happened was these women bribed their way through security checkpoints. they bribed the guards at the airport to let them onto the planes even though, you know, they didn't -- they hadn't gone through the proper procedures, they weren't searched, and then they detonated suicide bombs when they were onboard. so, you know, the system can be set up in a way that's designed to focus on these kind of threats, but it only takes one person, one, you know, corrupt guard who's willing to look the other way in exchange for a bribe of one kind or another to have the entire thing come apart and for a successful attack to be to pulled off. and i think that's one of the real unknowns as we think about how secure to olympics are going to be. >> i didn't see myself as a sort of prophet who has a message for

my world, but i do see myself as a person trying to understand my place in it, trying to situate in it. the idea for the book came to me when i was giving some lectures at the u.s. air force academy in colorado springs. and one of the very nice, very well educated, broad-minded liberal young air officer who was deputed to look after me had lots of chats with me which i found very interesting. and he told me that, he told me he was a liberal, because he wants to correct in my mind any impression i might have got from the media that the u.s. air force academy is, you know, very delatedly right wing and full of strange radical, biblical fundamentalists. he tells me he's a liberal, and he tells me he was in favor of immigration which i thought was very big of him. but, he said, when people come to this country, they should

learn the native language. and i didn't think he was speaking about comanche or ute, so i said, yes, i quite agree, everyone should learn spanish. >> the settlement and evolution of the united states from a hispanic perspective. our america, saturday night at 10 eastern and sunday at 9, on "after words." booktv this weekend on c-span2. and online at booktv's book club, you still have time to weigh in on mark levin's the liberty amendments, read the book and join the conversation. go to booktv.org and click on book club to enter the chat room. >> did i feel prepared? yes, i really did. first of all, i wasn't elected, so so it didn't make that much difference. i did notice, though, the difference between being the vice president's wife and the president's wife is huge. because the vice president's wife can say anything, nobody cares. the minute you say one thing as president's wife, you've made

the news. so that was a lesson i had to learn pretty quickly. >> watch our program on first lady barbara bush at our web site, c-span.org/firstladies. or see it saturday on c-span at 7 p.m. eastern. and live monday, our series continues with first lady hillary clinton. >> steve phillips is a lawyer and philanthropist who helped create the country's first super pac, power pac which supports democratic candidates. he recently spoke at the city club of cleveland about the changing demographics, race and politics in america. this is just under an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon and welcome to the city club of cleveland.

my name is paul harris, and i am president of the city club's board of directors. i am very belizeed to introduce -- pleased to introduce today's speaker, steve phillips, president and one of first founders of power pac. as stated, power pac is a nonprofit advocacy and political organization established this -- in 2004 to, quote, chan injuses -- champion justice in states and communities across the country. before i comment on pacs, i want to say a few words about our esteemed speaker's background. mr. phillips grew up in cleveland, cleveland heights, so he's back home today, and he has a lot of friends in the audience gathered throughout this room. he attended stanford university where he majored in english, and he was very active in student organizations. he later earned his law degree from hastings college of law in san francisco. he worked for four years with the public interest law firm public advocates, and at the

young age of 28, was elected to the san francisco board of education, thereby becoming the youngest elected official in san francisco history. he later became president of the board of education and served on the board for eight years. our accomplished speaker's appearance today is timely as we somewhere an -- as we enter an election year that is certain to be an active one with pacs and super pacs playing a role in the political process. a brief bit of history on pacs. pacs exist at both the federal and the state level. at the federal level, the first pac was formed in 1947. in 1970s, congress passed laws governing pacs including establishing contribution limits. more recently, in the wake of court decisions including the united states supreme court's admission citizens united which was rendered in january of 2010, so-called super pacs have emerged. now, they're prohibited from making contributions directly to a campaign, but they're able to

make unlimited political spending independently of campaigns. the impact of money funneled through pacs and super pacs continues to be hotly debated. our speaker will present his informed views on that subject as well as, of course, on another hot topic from the 2012 presidential election, the impact of demographic shifts in our country on the 2012 election and on future elections. so with that, i am very pleased to present on behalf of the city club of cleveland steve phillips, president and cofounder of power pac. finish. [applause] >> thank you, paul, for that introduction. i'm very grateful to be here. just an addendum in terms of the bio part, one of the things we created last year through an organization called pac plus,.org, plus, there's actually going to be materials i'll be referencing through the site, and there's things on the

table that we had had here as well. we were talking about how i have a lot of friends here, and it's very touching and moving to me. it made me think, you know, if you ever -- this is probably the closest you can have of actually seeing what it would be like who would come to your funeral without actually dying. [laughter] and hopefully, this won't be a near-death experience for me as i try and deliver these remarks. [laughter] and i do want to give a special thank you to sean da who introduced me to dan and arranged this opportunity for me to speak here. he and i have been friends since our days at stanford in the 1980s. and i always knew he was a smart guy who had great potential, but he really proved it when he decided to marry a woman from cleveland heights. [laughter] and i'm very proud of the leadership that saboe has provided around issues of equality and justice and was privileged to vote with him in

2008 to bring out people of color to the polls in that election. and i do want to thank all of you for coming out today. it is good to be home. and it is great to see so many friends from my days at hawkins school, my days on dartmore road. and i would like to dispel one rumor at the outset. i am not here to interview for the browns' head coaching position. [laughter] so although -- [laughter] although as a longtime browns fan, my dad got my brothers and i season tickets when we were 7 years old, so aye been a passionate, longtime fan. i'm eagerly following this process and, as always, looking forward to next season. [laughter] seriously, though, it's an honor to be invited to speak at the city club. this is a prestigious platform for anyone to speak from, but for a kid from cleveland

heights, this is a special honor, and i'm humbled to stand here today. and as if it wasn't daunting enough, my father, who's here today and flew up from texas, told me he's heard two people speak here in his whole life, martin luther king and bobby kennedy. so no pressure, dad. [laughter] cleveland is a perfect place to have a discussion about brown is the new white, the future of u.s. politics in the context of america's demographic revolution. long before america elected a black president, cleveland blazed the trail by becoming the first major more than city to elect a black mayor, carl stokes. for those of you under a certain age, that was 1967. and i still remember my mom making a point to drive us by mayor stokes' house on the way to see my grandparents who lived on east 1128th street -- 128th street. many in national politics have been slow to appreciate these changes.

the fact of the matter is that there is a new majority coalition in america, and that coalition is built on the solid foundation of the country's growing numbers of people of color. and that is what we mean by brown is the new white. to perhaps state the obvious, for the past 400 years or so the united states has been a majority white country. it is worth noting that the continent had many native americans and mexicans prior to the arrival of europeans. and that's why we talk about the past 400 years. but for the purposes of understanding contemporary american politics, the majority of the country and its voters have been white for a long time. consequently, addressing the needs of and responding to the interests of whites has been the central organizing principle of u.s. politics for a long time. when people talk about winning over swing voters or not alienating moderates, the picture they have in their head is of suburban whites, often

women, frequently in ohio. in the 1960s television nixon's silent majority, in the '90s, soccer moms and in the early 2000s, ex-urban voters. these constituent constituencies have been the focus of politicians and their consultants. similarly, public policy has been hypersensitive to polling and impressions of what might alienate modern white voters. recently, we've seen a lot of articles about how will americans feel about obamacare. my first thought was that those americans who are getting health care for the first time in their life would feel pretty good. but the premise of the question as articulated is how will middle class whites react to the affordable care act. but that premise is now outdated and anachronistic. one of the masters of american politics was willie brown, former mayor of san francisco and the longest-serving speaker of the assembly. there was a failed coup in the late '80s, and i still remember him saying that the

first law of politics is you have to learn to count. those who are most effective in 2014 ask beyond will be those -- and beyond will be those who know how to count. as bill clinton famously said in his 2012 democratic convention speech, it's about arithmetic. so let's do a little math today. as i mentioned, those who are following online or outside of the room that there's a document we have that downloads data and the statistics i'm going to detail this a moment, it's available at pacplus.org. we have a paper of color that runs through all work. so the arithmetic. 29 plus 26 equals 55. that is the new equation for this new era. allow me to explain. the 2010 census confirmed that there has been a profound demographic revolution in

america over the past 30 years. latinos, asian-americans, african-americans, native americans and mixed of race americans are now 36% of the entire u.s. population. no one responds when i do these numbers, but i hear from people that not all people of color are progressive. believe me, i know. i often shake my head wondering what some of these folks are actually thinking. [laughter] but the crowest statistical measure we have in the country for political ideology is national exit polls, the presidential exit polls. and that data shows that the vast majority of people of color vote democrat. in the last election, 80% of communities of color voted for obama. so all people of color comprise 36% of the population, 80% of them -- once you strip out the conservative of color -- issue 29% of the u.s. population. now, you might look at those numbers and think, well, the percentages of whites have slunk, but they're still the

majority. 60%, plus there's the 7% who are conservatives with color, and that would be correct. that would be good arithmetic. which brings us to another very important yet historically neglected and overlooked minority group in america, progressive whites. progressive whites are the rodney dangerfield of american politics. [laughter] they just don't get any respect. [laughter] they're frequently belittled or dismissed asker relevant tree huggers or vegetarians or both. [laughter] the caricature of progressive whites was captured during the 2004 presidential campaign when a conservative attack ad took aim at howard dean supporters by saying howard dean should take his tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, volvo-driving, new york times-reading, body-piercing, hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show back to vermont. [laughter]

now, i live in a very liberal city, in san francisco, and i must confess that some people do drink la todays and read the -- lattes and read "the new york times." they're still lovely people. [laughter] but if we look back historically, we will see that the role of progressive whites in american social change has been both heroic and vilified. from the ab -- abolitionists in 1859 to those who gave their lives in the 1960s civil rights movement, people in selma, alabama, andrew goodman and michael scherrer in in mississippi, progressives have a long tradition of rejecting their privilege, refusing to stand idly by and courageously standing with disenfranchised people who are struggling for justice, equality and democracy. this tradition has touched and improved my own life personally. back in, as far back as 1964 when hi parents couldn't buy the home they wanted on dartmore

road in cleveland heights because they were black, but a progressive white lawyer who worked with fair housing bought the house for them, deeded it over to them, and it became the childhood home that i grew up in. in terms of u.s. politics, people have always thought that there were too few progressive whites to matter, but with the growth of latino, black and asian populations, that is no longer the case. the you look again at the exit polls going back to jimmy carter's election, we see anywhere from 34% to 48% of whites have voted for the democratic candidate for president. in some years that was a more courageous act than others. and so back to the arivet he tick. 54% of the country is white. of that population, 41% are progressives. so that means that the progressive white population in the country is 26% of the entire united states. so you take that 26%, add that

to the 29% who are people of color, it gives you the 55% which is the new majority in america. .. 19% of voters of color is threshold whether a coalition of people of color and progressive whites can win an election.

in the 20102010 republican tidal wave, three states withstood the wave and reelected democrats to the senate, colorado, california, and nevada. all three of those democrats who won those elections lost the white vote but were able to prevail because of this coalition. so colorado had 19% of its population with voters of color and we use that as a benchmark. this is where the picture comes most sharply into focus. 24 states in america will soon have 11% voters of color. in those states are overwhelmingly in the south and southwest. arizona, georgia and texas, are the new battleground states. yes, texas. one of the most important races in the country this year will be wendy davis's run for governor of the state of texas. if democrats take texas, it will cut the legs out of the conservative political machine and make it nearly impossible for the white pub bub to win white house in the next 20

years. georgia, where barack obama lost 6 percentage points without even contesting the race represents the best democratic pickup for the senate as michelle nunn goes for her seat her father held. takes 20 to be elected president. these 24 states have 300 congressional seats. 218 is magic number for majority in the house. these states have the power to elect the next president and secure the control of the congress. much jesse jackson ran for president the hand that once picked cotton and lettuce can pick presidents, senators and presidents and governors. if the democrats were smart they would be massively investing in communities of color in the south and southwest. conservatives have done the math and it is no accident that they are massively investing efforts to restrict voting rights in the south and southwest. while obama's campaign did spend

considerable resources mobilizing and turning out these new majority voters in north carolina, virginia, nevada, colorado and florida in several months in 2012 with the results to show for it there is nonetheless still no lasting strategy, program, or leadership pipeline carried out by the democrats in these key areas. apparently too many democrats have trouble with math. and there is a shocking underinvestment in the communities of color as too many campaigns continue to chase the ever-slipping block of modrat white voters instead of building up a coalition of the future. many republicans on other hand are apparently better than math at democrats. admittedly on the surface looks like the republicans are locked in a fierce internal battle. you have the tea party who i would submit fighting the last losing battle of the civil war, desperately and destructively trying to tear down the entire government, rather than let barack obama, duly elected

president, address the nation's problems, the early indications however are that the tea party movement has crested. with the implosion of the tea party challenger to governor kasich. we see that happening in ohio as well. other more sophisticated republican forces are asserting themselves, forces who know arithmetic and know it well. eight years after losing to the first black president, the republicans will likely field a better presidential candidates, 30 to 40% candidates of color. marco rubio, ted cruz, bobby jindal is running as fast as they can while the democratic bench is surprisingly empty. you new jersey governor chris christie has new set of problems on his hands which i admit enjoying watching he nonetheless past few years meticulously distancing him self from the reactionary parts of his party and courting black and hispanic

voters. democrats run the risk of getting complacent in the face of republican internal squabbles and underestimated the republican threat to their base. historically republicans have been so bad on matters of race and equality, democrats have not had to do anything. soon they will actually have to contest pour the votes of people of color and making a an argument why they are better than the republicans in addressing needs of communities of color. that is an argument that few democrats frankly are familiar with or comfortable making. lastly, what are the policy implications of the emerging new majority in america? i tell my friend who spend a lot of time developing position papers and reasoned arguments to influence the public policy debate that as a general rule elected officials will support any policy that they think will get them reelected which bring us back to the question just who they think they're doing electing and unelecting and who will be the voters in the upcoming elections? let's look at health care as a

case study. if you're primarily concerned about moderate, middle class white voters you might well be nervous about obamacare. there will undoubtedly be some people whose premiums will go up, albeit to pay for more robust coverage, that part is lost in the hubub sometimes, but if your objective to solidify loyalty among rapidly growing latino population in america, you should note latinos have the least access to health care of any demographic group in the country with 35% lacking health insurance. so rather than wringing your hand and worry about how obamacare is polling among moderate whites, smart politicians should be out in the latino community every day championing how many people are now the accidenting health care, how many people can now see a doctor, how many sick people can finally get treatment. then they should be smacking their opponents upside the head with ads asking why they think that the richest nation in the history the, history the world should deny people access to

basic health care? how is that moral or right or religious? in one stroke you can win over your growing base, put your opponents on the defensive, and also win over church-going moderate whites by appealing to their sense of morality and religion. after all the bible does command us to care for the sick and address the needs ever the least of these. another example is policy implications of the new majority is economic inequality. if you look at a map of the distribution of poverty in america, you will see that the heaviest concentrations of poverty fall largely along the same lines as the rising black and latino populations, the south and the southwest. although these regions are seen as conservative, they're what is called unnaturally conservative and they have the least to conserve. the smart politician would champion a minimum wage increase, use that as an argument to win over low-income whites, as well as people of

color. the party who crack that is code, will rule politics in this country for decade to come. how this talk brown is the new white because i frankly want to get peep's attention. one day to do that is be explicit about issues of race and ethnicity. part of why it gets attention because addressing race touches on deep seed fears and insecurities of how the country is changing. fears about how a cherished way life is perceived to be disappearing n fact you can't truly understand politics in america today without appreciating the inner play between the demographic revolution and efforts by too many demagogues in congress who whip up fear and stoke insecurity and in an attempt to foment opposition anything that is proposed by our african-american commander-in-chief. let me just close with the good news that you have nothing to

fear. you know that people of color like good food. [laughing] you know we make good music in culture. turns out that many of us are socialable, smart, share the same values as you. in fact, those of us who come from communities that have faced discrimination and oppression are actually often the most hopeful and idealistic of all and dr. king's famous speech, he said, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow i still have a dream. is a dream deeply rooted in the american dream. so if you're worried, put aside your fears and let's work together to build a better america. if you're a progaggressive white, your time has finally come. my friend van jones says, if blacks don't vote, greens don't win. if you're a person of color, let's grasp the role of responsibility that history has presented us. the bible says that the rejected stone will be the cornerstone of

the new order. let's use that cornerstone to build a new social structure in america that we can all be proud of. , a structure of opportunity, equality, and justice for all. thank you very much. [applause] >> today at the city club of cleveland we're listening to a friday forum featuring steve phillips, president and cofounder of powerpac. we'll return to the speaker in a moment for traditional city club question and answer period. i suggest you formulate your questions now and try to keep them brief and to the point so we get as many questions in as possible. we welcome all of you here and those joining us via broadcast on wviz-ppf, 93.3, wcbn and

104.9, wclv, idea stream. wtam or one of many broadcast partners we here at the city club have across the country. broadcasts of city club are made possible by cleveland state university and pnc and live webcasts are supported by the university of akron. next friday, one week from today, january 17, the city club will host a breakfast program with norton bonaparte, city manager, for sanford, florida, who helped the city manage emotions and policies after the trayvon martin killing. we will host a lunchtime forum featuring sue hall pert, chief economist at the united states department of commerce as part of our business leaders series. for a complete list of our upcoming programs to make a reservation or to order a cd or dvd of one of our many programs, please visit our website and that is www.cityclub.org. we welcome our many guests at

tables hosted by baker & hostetler, cleveland state university, hawkins school as steve mentioned is his alma mater, policy matters ohio, the shondra law firm and our strategy. thank you all for your support today. we welcome students to today's program. student participation is made popular by a generous gift from the fred shaw charitable foundation. today we welcome students from cleveland heights high school. we also have students from hawkins school here. i will ask all our students to stand and be recognized. [applause] and just a remind they're students get to ask questions. now we'll return as promised to our speaker for our traditional city club question and answer period. we welcome questions from everyone including guests and students. holding the microphones today are development associate mike

grimaldi and administrative assistant kristin pianka. where is kristin? there she is. first question please. >> i want to thank you for being here. your presentation was wonderful. my question is,, there's this arrogance problem with a lot of people who feel like they know everything and so even though what you're say something really logical, it is still difficult to get some folks to say, you know, you're right. so i guess my question is, how do you, how do you move, and i'm speaking of, you know, democrats, basically, how do you move them off of that, my way is the best way and i know what i'm doing, to begin to embrace some of your ideas? i know that's a really hard question but want to see what you're going to say. >> i was hoping you would have the answer for me for that question. [laughter] i mean frank that is one of the

big challenges. it is almost endemic to a certain extent to the proposition is that if you help elect somebody president of the united states, you're going to think you're a very big deal, or that you know a lot. that is part of the challenge people not actually appreciating that. i don't think frankly it is as much as an issue of making a logical numerical argument. people know what they know, they know what they're familiar with and tend to do that. a couple of different things we're looking at trying to move forward. so, one is, i think we have to be thinking about what is the pipeline and the leadership development work that we're actually doing, identifying people with diverse background, encouraging them to go into campaigns, supporting them to be able to do that and helping them move forward in that regard. it applies at every different level. i want to acknowledge and commend senator nina turner who has an african-american woman running her campaign. that is an unusual thing in u.s.

politics. we need more politicians doing that. when cory booker ran his race he had an african-american men run his race. these apprenticeship experiences create and put people in place. i think we'll also have to make, raise our voices. if you look towards 2016, in particular will be a next major piece we have to be asking about this and pushing people at every level. i've seen now the career path, there is a woman who used to work for me, we were doing our, pac work in 2007 in california and wanted to move into ohio doing the statewide campaign, jen brown, that put her into position to be executive director in effort in state of texas. you move up from level to level. it matters to ask whether you're connected to, the county, region, the state, asking the question, who are you actually promoting, who are you investing in. i think it will be largely incumbent upon those of us who

want to see this happen to both be a squeaky wheel around it and as well as trying to be nurturing an elevating next generation of people who want to do this kind of work. >> your statistics seem to be based on last, based on the last two presidential elections where a very charismatic african-american was up. but what would have happened and how would those statistics been skewed if the fact we have, which very might well have in the next presidential election a white candidate? >> yeah, well that's the 64,000, $640 million question i think in a lot of ways and, it is really going to be, see how that will play itself out. i thinking about doing gathering or think about question after the black president. we're starting to have that conversation and what is that actually going to look like. so that was very helpful and should not be minimized.

yet, lost on understanding what the obama campaign did, we all talk about, african-american candidate, you had a lot of technology and cutting-edge tools but end of the day but they have thousands of paid people doing really the methodical drudge work of going door-to-door, contacting people, identifying people, turning them out. so there's that. the other problem i think is that there is also challenge around what is the policy agenda? are we articulating a policy agenda speak to people and don't bring out people that don't necessarily vote. many people in minimum wage campaigns, run on theme of, vote yourself a raise. become as tangible point why you're voting just beyond this particular person. i would submit for 2016, we saw, in many ways the 08 election was culmination of 40 years of civil rights movement. there is reason oprah and jesse jackson were crying. there had been such a history around what that meant.

the next wave of what is pent up within this country in terms of leadership in assendance of leadership is women's leadership, women's empowerment and women's role running the country. as much as there is strong sentiment that propelled people around electing the first african-american president, i'm already seeing there will be a similar sentiment around electing the first woman president. i think that will be a big factor in turnout in 2016. >> thank you. if i looked, think about a little history, back in the 18 hundreds there were signs, irish need not apply and my ancestors from italy, italians were not allowed in shaker heights somewhat early on. to what degree do you see what is happening with people of color as kind of an extension or not an extension of what is already happened where it used to be that irish and italians were considered sort of outside of the fold and now everybody think of them as white and

wouldn't think anything about it? >> i think, i do think that is taking place. there is writer james baldwin wrote, it is collection of his works called, the price of the ticket and his intro essay says the price after ticket for european immigrants was to become white. and so that that definitely has taken place. you do frankly see it in different regard, particularly in terms of different elements of latino and hispanic community. in some aspects of asian community, desire to be treated in just that kind of a mainstream fashion. the challenges that, color is such a so ingrained in terms of our society and perceptions and biases and prejudices, and dr. king talked about the number of synonyms for the word black, versus number of synonyms for the word white and what connotations of that word was this is deep in the culture around the country in terms of

the color line, the color issues. so it is more difficult when you look that different to just be a simulated in. i think that will be part of the challenge. frankly i think the hope would be we would actually move to a point of not wanting to sublimate the distinctive pieces and validate all that together. difference between melting pot and salad bowl. it is all in there mixed together but he retain distinctive characteristic and distinctive flavor of various communities. >> mr. phillips, as a conservative and someone who believes in liberty i probably come out at a different solution than you on some things but i accept as i think many do that the challenge that those of us who believe differently also have obligation to communicate with the brown community. but my question is, with respect to your statistics there was recently university of akron, there was a seminar talked about one of the best predictors, actually, for example of voting patterns was religious

affiliation or religious belief, rather than race or anything else for that matter. and there's a lot of folks who are of color, african-american churches, his panics who are very active in their churches who i think, the polls suggest come out to a very different point than the progressive point of view on a number of issues, whether it is social issues, whether it's limited government, fiscal conservism, a lot of other things. you know, isn't there, the likelihood that what we need to do is come together somewhere more in the middle rather than the extremes of either end and have a conversation more about a range of ideas and a range of solutions? >> i think i agree with that. we used to talk back in '80s, it is not about left-wing or right-wing but the moral center. one of the critiques i have of the, progressive faith community is that we don't make enough, we

don't associate the progressive agenda enough with the strong religious and biblical underpinnings of things like dealing with poverty and addressing health care and et cetera. i actually think that is potential area to be able to come together. and let me be clear. my fundamental point is also a challenge to progressives and democrats that they can not take people's color for granted. george bush was very effective within texas around understanding and validating the cultural realities, cultural sentiments of latino community, very effective record around that. his faith based initiative won over a number of different folks in those communities towards being allied with him. people used to say back in the day, if, no permanent friend, no permanent enemies but permanent interests. we're talking about addressing and improving the conditions of people in the society, extending the benefits of the american dream broadly. i think there are things that

can be done in that regard. my wife and i talk about how there is lot more common ground among conservatives and liberals around criminal justice issues. there is lot of, very expensive proposition to go about criminal justice work the way we do it in this country. republican leaders in the south and mississippi, talk about deincarceration. alternative ways to rehabilitate people, that type of a solution. we were very supportive of cory booker who we went to college with as well. he is looking to reach across the aisle to different republicans around some of these sentencing reform issues. so i'm all for, particularly nothing can get passed in the current situation that where we can find agreement, i'm all for that. i'm not arguing that it should be proposition that just moves in that regard. there are a lot of things that democrats in particular have been slow on, in terms of validating sum of these

different pieces. faith in people's lives. values that flow from that and building agenda that speaks for that as well. i think there is work to be done in that as well. >> i would, oh. hi, my name is dale casey. as a hawk alumni i'm sure i speak for the community how proud we have of you what you have become in your life. i was reminiscing to think 35 years ago i used to sit in your small little tv room and watch you dip french fries into your frosty there and used to think you were kind of weird. [laughter] just want to say how impressed and how happy we are what you are trying to achieve but on a serious note, but my question is, i know you're talk is about the browning of america and new states, new states to look at sparse texas and things of that nature. right now ohio always seems to hold itself around election time being pivotal and important

state. before we went to move on from that, what do you think, what would be your recommendation for ohio, specifically because all of it comes down to that last night and always we never know which way we're going to swing. i would love to have, maybe a blueprint or some plan or just some advise from your perch point what ohio could specifically do for 2016, even now, with our government, our governor election coming up? so maybe you could help with that. >> right. back in high school you didn't think i would amount to much, did you? [laughter] but, though ohio remains one of the bellwether states within the country and it, a lot of ways, interesting because ohio is almost split right down the middle in terms of its electoral trend, efforts in ohio make a bigger difference because the margin is so small. if you can actually increase the

participation that has an impact much. it's worth studying and understanding better what obama did to be able to win here in that, the increased significantly, the african-american turnout in way that is really, if you read these postelection books shocked romney people and shocked karl rove. you watched his meltdown on election night. he couldn't believe what was transpiring but their models were wrong how many african-americans would actually turn out. so this is really, this is part of the challenge too, this work it is not should be epsoddic work. i had should not be every four years, in october we try to turn folks out. what is the civic engagement, infrastructure and involvement in leadership development that is going on round-the-clock? and so, almost back to the civic club type of days is that people who were precinct leader turning out for obama, can they be

supported to be civic leaders and getting people to the city council meeting or to be part of a block club. so you start to know who all of your neighbors r you continue to have that relationship. so when election types comes around and you know who to meet, not returning out them. talking about how much has been preserved of the barack obama infrastructure. that is one of the biggest jobs we can think about doing, is how to actually sustain the activist, the organizers, who get inspired and do this work between election cycles. essentially we're able to preserve that kind of infrastructure it will enable i think for us to continue to have the outcomes we want to see. >> in spite of ohio's division between republicans and democrats and presidential elections we have apportion shunment of congressional districts done in such a way there is only one competitive district in the state of ohio and that is the lincoln, la

turret's former districts. i would like you to address issue in broader basis of the, let's say malappouring shunment of congressional districts and impact on progressive movement. >> i believe redistricting is going to be the most important political fight of the next 20 years. and so, that it is underappreciated how much the republican wave of 2010, taking over all different statehouses and drawing the lines in we have ven that is locked in a undemocratic configuration of congressional districts. democrats won more, more people voted for democrats for cop guess than voted for republicans but republicans still have an

18-seat majority in the house and that is the configuration of redistricting and gerrymandering frankly. but i feel like that progressives were asleep at the switch. there was a lot of effort and a lot around the fences, very little resources, very little effort, very little organizing in the actual engaging of drawing of the lines. we need to be vigilant and proactive around that. so seven years from now, we should all mark it on our calendars that we have got to be engaged in that process. the other thing to think about are there ways to also demock advertise the lines drawn? . .

>> something to not give up on, that you can actually have it be a more objective piece, then you can draw lines that reflect what is the actual compositionment you're correct, in a state that's this divided, that's this close every presidential election, that's not reflective of what's in the state, and i think it is worth engaging this that fight to be able to draw lines that are fair and reflective of who's in the state. >> thank you. you mentioned some of the issues that the republican party seems to be having. you mentioned infighting and potentially the cresting of the tea party.

but you also cited, i think you called them sophisticated republican forces, that are emerging. and i was hoping to ask you to educate us a little bit about some of these forces that you see and what we might want to know about them and watch them and watch what they're doing. >> well, i mean, i think before his recent troubles, we'll see how that plays itself out, but i think chris christie has been actually quite masterful at his political route that he's taken within new jersey. in that he has, quite the contrary of all the hostility and visit roll we see about the -- vitriol we see about the president, he's literally embracing the president and working across party lines on problems addressing the state of new jersey. so then that creates a certain profile and a certain image. and then he's been very meticulous around reaching out to leaders within the different communities of color, in that he

actually had, you know, the house refuses to even take up immigration reform, but they passed the state-based act for immigration reform in new jersey. and, i mean, he whittled it down a little bit, but basically, he signed that deal. so i know one of the more left, pro-immigration advocacy groups has on their facebook page, yea, chris christie, great job you're doing. so you can see that. then like yesterday marco rubio is starting to look at, speak up about poverty issues and inequality. quoting ip equality in the country, pushes around the minimum wage, so rubio is starting to talk about, well, there are other ways of dealing with it. historically, people have not addressed those issues. we've been able to say, you know, we stand for ending poverty, we stand more, you know, multicultural inclusion. and that's been the defining,

that's been sufficient to define the distinctions between the parties. but when you have both parties say, no, we're for ending poverty too, we're for dealing with cultural diversity as well, then it's a different, then you have to dig deeper. and democrats are not as used to doing that, actually, and are going to actually have to be more intentional and assertive around putting forward what they think should be the agenda to meet people's needs. >> looking at our current senate, they're a little bit notorious for not being able to pass any bills at all. and this is an issue that it seems like both political parties are going to have to address. do you see an area where we could start to compromise around this issue of colored voters and where both parties come together to create a mutually beneficial agreement that benefits both the political parties and the people that are voting? >> give me a minute.

[laughter] on that one. i think, i mean, just quite frankly, i think that it is no accident that there are so many efforts to suppress the vote right now. there's a very clear understanding that the more diverse the voting population becomes, the expectation is the worse that it's going to be for the republicans. and so that is why you see these efforts to, you know, throw up all manner of legal roadblocks. one would think that this is a democracy and that in a democracy you would want everybody to vote and that we should be doing everything we can to encourage people to vote. it's particularly maddening to me watching in florida people standing in line for hours and hours and hours trying to be able to vote with the governor, his own constituents not seeming to care that his people are going through that kind of difficulty because it was serving, actually, a political, his political end. so it's going to be a challenge.

i mean, the one thing i think about is some of the folks who are actually trying to get ahead of this curve, the marco rubios of the world. he's trying to stake out this position around immigration reform be, trying to do this piece around the poverty part. can you look at some of those folks to be able to partner, and i think it would actually be in their interest to be seen within these communities as being concerned about the needs and about the interest. the other idea, the potential is out there, what i wonder is how much we can actually try to achieve common ground around the application of technology, right? when you go to the department store, you don't have to wait. you can pull out your credit card, and you can buy whatever you want to buy right then. so why is it so difficult to vote, right? if they can verify who you are when you want to spend some money, why can't we verify who somebody is when we want them to

actually vote? i keep wondering can we partner with the googles and apples of the world to be able to have that technological validation in ways that might cross some partisan boundaries. >> welcome home. >> thank you. >> so we now understand your thesis that brown is the new white and that that's going to fundamentally change the political dynamic in our country. could you tell us more about what your organization, pac plus, is doing to leverage that opportunity, what they're doing specifically in ohio, around the country, what they're planning on doing and how people can get involved if they want to? >> so what we're trying to do is to create an infrastructure and a vehicle to respond to this changing demographic moment. and so we want to connect and coordinate progressive people across the country, use technological can tools to be able to pool resources and move resources in coordination to strategic races in these states

that are going through demographic changes. so we pool money from across the country, moved money last year to support wendy davis when she was running for re-election to the state senate in texas before she became famous this past year. and so looking at the pooled resources, put money behind cory booker, becoming the first -- not the first but the next democratic senator, african-american senator within the u.s. senate. and that's what we're looking for, people like that across the country. and we're really, frankly, trying to diversify the population of elected officials and the elected leadership within the country in a way that we can have people who are both inspiring and committed to addressing the needs of the cup's new majority. -- the country's new majority. in some ways, people refer to us as an emily's list for candidates of color type of a model. so that's the work that we're trying to do. also trying to put good information and data out there so people can understand what is actually happening, we can make

political plans based upon an appreciation of actual, good arithmetic. so that's the basic thrust in the work. people can learn more and sign up at pacplus dork, and it's been -- pacplus.org, and it's enabled us to get connected with like-mined and idealistic people across the country. >> mr. phillips, you said earlier that a lot of communities of color want to be treated as part of the mainstream, and as a result, they may shy away from grouping together to have these hard discussions about politics and race. so how can communities of color overcome this barrier and start having these discussions? >> i am a strong believer in the power of leadership in that we have to be able to identify, support and then connect leaders within all of these different communities. and so it is looked at historic -- and we saw the movie

on mandela over the holidays. you just have to understand some of how the south african freedom struggle as you have leaders and organizations -- leaders create organizations, and those organizations relate to their communities. and so without those leaders who are connecting people, educating people, informing people, encouraging others to participate, it's going to be very difficult. and so i think that that is the, something i've been very focused on trying to identify energetic, committed, conscientious, talented younger people to take on a leadership role and to be able to encourage and work with and educate and move their communities. and that, i think, is really one of the core, critical components of it. in addition to that, if we can people in each of those communities doing work with their communities so then those leaders have relationships with one another, that's how you build a broad, multiracial, inclusive movement that can move the country forward. >> hi.

my name is christina. i would like to ask since you said that about 80% of all brown america is democratic leaning, how would you see it if the republicans were smart enough to run a candidate like condoleezza rice? would the brown community support, support her, do you think? that's one question. and my other question to you is why has the affordable care act created such a riff in america? i mean, it's not just created a rift among corporate america, but it's also created a rift among americans themselves. it's like a topic you just don't ever want to bring up. [laughter] >> on the condi rice thing, well, my first thought is don't give them any ideas, right? [laughter] so, and interestingly, there was talk about her running for senate or governor in california, which i was, frankly, concerned about precisely because of these reasons. she's not the ideological figure, she's a woman, she's

african-american, you know, you would be an appealing candidate. but she did not fit the conservative orthodoxy, the california republican party. so she couldn't get the support to actually move that forward. then similarly, when colin powell was thinking about running for president this '96, he would have been formidable as well. so, it's, i mean, these things -- we do have, which gets me to the next question, a contentious history within this country, right? i don't think we like to talk about it, but we've come together through taking the land from the native american, taking the south from the mexicans, enslaving african-americans in the way the country has been built with all of that history, it's still very challenging and still at the core of a lot of the politics of country. so people like condoleezza or koh-in powell -- colin powell are more sensitive to that history and want to speak to

that, want to address these inequities within our society. and there's another very vociferous, what i would say far-right political grouping which wants to preserve the status quo as unequal as it is. because they have some benefit within it. so that's a big part of the tension. and then what's happened to the health care piece is that, you know, i'm going to talk about that when we have the war on poverty, the 50th anniversary now, when bobby kennedy went to west virginia and talked about we have poverty and lifted up poor children, that that touched something in everybody about these children, this is not right. we should do something about this. it touched the morality, the conscience of the nation. part of the challenge of the history of the country is that we feel the sense of otherness, and so if a child looks differently or doesn't speak our language, that's not the same

empathetic response we have had. so this notion around everybody should have health care because we're a great nation that has the capacity and that's what our values are is not the way the conversation's playing out, which is one of my frustrations with the white house, frankly. and so instead it's like those people are taking, are getting health care and taking money from me. and it's just the vision. and that's partly, i think, which is tied to the historic division within the country. i think that's why we have actually had this. my hope is we can elevate that debate to the level of who are we as a nation that is inclusive of all of us, speaks to our values and embraces all of us regardless of what we look like or what we might sound like. [applause] >> today at the city club we have been listening to a friday forum featuring steve phillips,

president and co-founder of power pac. thank you, many phillips. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. this forum is now adjourned. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> well, politico reports today that republican senator david vitter announced this morning that he will run for governor of louisiana in 2015. quote: i believe that as our

next governor, i can have a bigger opportunity addressing the unique challenges we have. as golf senator vitter said he would work to improve louisiana's lagging education system, make the state for business-friendly and work to clean up the state's politics. you can see the rest of the article if you go to politico.com. live picture of the u.s. capitol. you can barely see it this afternoon as heavy snow falls down. forecasters predicting up to 8 inches today. the federal government is shut down due to the weather. many of the programs that we planned to bring you live this morning, this afternoon also got canceled. one that was not canceled was a discussion on security at the sochi winter olympic games. authorities are searching for several possible black widow suicide bombers who have threatened to cause havoc at the games. here's a portion of this morning's discussion. >> one, and you've heard a lot of discussion in this in the

russian press recently in terms of the capacity of the security services, they're essentially structured differently from the way that security services this the wes are structured. their main goal is regime security rather than public security. let's say. and, obviously, with a high profile, very politically-significant event like to olympics, those two things are connected. it's directed more at inflating the regime from pressures coming from outside to rather than it is towards securing the public in general. and i think one of the challenges that that apparatus faces this the context of the olympics is trying to do that pivot tremendous icily because of the political -- precisely because of the political importance it has, and i don't know about the capacity to do that. the second point that i would just emphasize here, and this is

something that we haven't talked about, but i think it's really important in a lot of contexts related to the olympics is corruption. the discussion in russia has a lot of, in the lead-up to games has really focused on this element, on the amount of money that's been misappropriated, misplaced, gone into dodgy contracts and offshore bank accounts. by almost all accounts, these are going to be the most expensive to limb puck games ever, upwards of $50 billion. as much of a third of that may have just simply been embezzled or stolen. what does this have to do with security? is well, i think operationally the security services can be supremely effective, but they're only in the macro sense as effective as their weakest link. and in a lot of cases, the weakest link is corruption. you think about some of the successful attacks that have been carried out in russia over

the last decade or so, one that really, is really striking, i guess, is the when two female chechnyan suicide bombers blew up a russian aircraft in about, i want to say 2007 or so. i don't remember exactly -- >> [inaudible] >> 2004. okay. yeah, okay. and, essentially, what happened was these women bribed their way through security checkpoints. they bribed the guards at the airport to let them onto the planes even though, you know, they didn't -- they hadn't gone through the proper procedures, they weren't searched, and then they detonated suicide bombs when they were onboard. so, you know, the system can be set up in a way that's designed to focus on these kind of threats, but it only takes one person, one, you know, corrupt guard who's willing to look the other way in exchange for a bribe of one kind or another to

of the entire thing come apart and for a successful attack to be pulled off. and i think that's one of the real unknowns as we think about how secure the olympics are going to be. >> i didn't see myself as a sort of prophet who has a message for my world, but i do see myself as a person trying to find my place in it, frankly, situate myself in it. and i think the idea for the book came to me when i was giving some lectures at the u.s. air force academy in colorado springs. and one of the very nice, very well educated, broad-minded liberal young air force officer who was deputed to look after me had lots of chats with me which i found very interesting. and he told me he was a liberal, because he wanted to correct in my mind any impression i might have got from the media that the u.s. air force academy is, you know, very beknightedly right wing and full of strange

radical, biblical fundamentalists. so he told me he was a liberal. and he told me that he was in favor of immigration, which i thought was very big of him. but, he said, when people come to this country, they should learn the native language. and i didn't think he was speaking about comanche or ute, so i said, yes, i quite agree, everybody should learn spanish. >> the settlement and evolution of the united states from a hispanic perspective. our america, saturday night at 10 eastern and sunday at 9 on "after words," part of booktv this weekend on c-span2. and online at booktv's book club, you still have time to weigh in on mark levin's "the liberty amendments," read the book and join the conversation. go to booktv.org and click on book club to somewhere the chat room. to enter the chat room. >> did i feel prepared? yes, i really did. first of all, i wasn't elected, so it didn't make that much difference.

i did notice, though, the difference between being the vice president's wife and the president's wife is huge, because the vice president's wife can say anything. nobody cares. the minute you say one thing as president's wife, you've made the news. so that was a lesson i i had to learn pretty quickly. >> watch our program on first lady barbara bush at our web site, c-span.org/firstladies or see it saturday on c-span at 7 p.m. eastern and live monday our series continues with first lady hillary clinton. >> an official from the health and human services department told congress last week there have been no reported hacking of health care to the governor so far -- healthcare.gov so far. it was part of the house oversight committee hearing on the security of private information on the site. a security expert from the centers for medicare and medicaid services also testified. this is just over two hours, ten minutes.

[inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to order. the oversight committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. first, americans have the right to know that the money washington takes from them is well spent. and, second, americans deserve an efficient, effective government that works for them. our duty on the government reform committee is to recollect these rights. -- protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to tax pay dwhrers -- taxpayers, because taxpayers have a right to know what they get from their government. we must work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to provide the american people the facts and bring genuine reform to federal

bureaucracy. we are here today to and examine fundamental questions about the security of healthcare.gov. we recognize best practices were not followed. was securing testing completed before the launch to the satisfaction of the experts, will be asked. what did top information security officials at the center for medicare or services and the department of health and human services recommend? were the people who knew about the technology empowered? were the decision makers people who knew about the technology? did leadership at cms and, hs follow these recommendations -- hhs follow these recommendations? if there was disagreement between people below the top, were these questions and concerns properly delivered to

higher-ups prior to the launch of the site? by now, the american people are well aware that there were functional problems in the healthcare.gov web site at launch. many may know that other web sites costing a fraction as much but doing the same thing worked better. for example, kentucky and hawaii launched sites that cost the federal taxpayer about one-third as much and seemed to work better. those questions and others need to be asked. but today our real question is, why does the administration steadfastly deny the existence of security problems and shortcomings and lack of security testing when, in fact, the experts, federal employees we hear from today will testify that there were known shortcomings and, in fact, unanswered questions at the time of the launch.

for many americans, myself included, it seems to defy common sense that a web site plagued with functional problems was, in fact, perfectly secure by design. additionally, when an individual finds himself while in one web site getting information delivered to him by mail acknowledging another individual from another state, we certainly know that there must be some cross-connect within the system that occurred, and that, in fact, was reported in the days shortly after the launch. this and other areas do concern this committee. but most important, because we are the oversight committee for federal contracting and federal employees, our investigation has been active and attempted to get directly to the contractors such as miter who did an evaluation that has been thwarted by the administration who warned and

tried to interfere with this committee by asking vendors not to deliver us information. but through subpoena we have learned that, in fact, there were flaws that were reported. it is now undeniable that miter and other companies did their job sufficient for people to know an alarm was being sounded in the days before the launch. we have acted to protect the information we receive from those entities. notwithstanding that, we have had repeated interference and claims that, in fact, we are the ones that are going to disclose a road map to hackers. what is so amazing is, in fact, the administration would like grow to believe that, first, there were -- would like you to believe that, first, there were no problems; second, any problems even though there were no problems had been mitigated,

or as i would quote or paraphrase the administration, plans to mitigate are in place. i've been in business a long time before i came to congress. a plan to mitigate means you have not mitigated. therefore, we will assume that any and all information given to us about known security risks at the time or prior to time of the launch are still there. our witnesses today for the most part cannot refute that, because what we discover is they have not been personally assured item by item of the actual hit gaition of -- mitigation of those shortcomings. as i talk in circles to a certain extent, i do so because we continue to hear from the administration there were no problems, the problems have been mitigated, and, oh, by the way, if you put out information about the problems others say exist, you're creating a road map to hackers. i don't think anyone can square

that, not my ranking member, not our witnesses. for that reason again, this committee will continue to look at all reports of alleged security shortcomings or unknown areas as, or in fact, very, very important to keep private. and we will do so because we must assume that the web site is still vulnerable, that the american people may, as we speak, be having their personal identifiable information hacked and taken, that, in fact, we cannot consider the web site secure. if anyone would like to say the web site is secure today, then i ask would you allow the former flaws to be put out there, and the answer, of course, will be no. in washington people like to talk off the both sides of their mouth. they like to say there never was a problem, the problem that never was has been fixed and, in fact, you may not put records of

the problem that never were because, in fact, they were known vulnerabilities. that is what we are facing today as we go into this. it would be comic if it wasn't, in fact, all of your irs records, links, health and human services, of course, but links to the department of homeland security and others. this web site has tentacles into some of the most personal information, and in the future, even more. more importantly, states have links into this same database and, in fact, one of the things we know which should not be the prime subject today is that the states for the most part were not ends tested, the states were not held to a standard of best practices. my only hope is that as we look to the billions of dollars provided in federal taxpayer money to the states that, in fact, consistently they did a better job in both operational readiness and security. but that is but a hope.

today's hearing will be about the failures or at least the failures to use best practices that went into the launch of this site. lastly, in a few minutes i'll be putting into the record a series of exchanges that went on between the white house and the speaker, between the secretary of health and human is thes through her -- human services through her surrogates and the chairman. and i will do so because i think it's important to understand, this is a serious, serious hearing. it's one many which the white house -- in which the white house went to the speaker of the house warning about the release of information and asking that information not be seen, not be heard and not be delivered to this committee. it's one in which the secretary said she wanted to meet again to me.

i flew back, and she refused to meet with me even though she was in town. i'm deeply disappointed that we're here today still dealing with the inability to deal with what happened prior to october 3st, what's -- october 1st, what's happened since october 1st and i think most importantly, a committee that on a bipartisan basis supports real reforms, real reforms that in many cases would have eliminated or mitigated some of the mistakes made and would have allowed the president's signature legislation to not be be marred by a web site that failed to perform at its launch and is still questionable in its security. lastly, i certainly want to make sure that we all understand the american people know that companies have been hacked, that credit card information has been taken. it's been widely publicized. the difference between target

and other companies who dealt with hackers is we don't have to put our credit card into that machine at target. we don't have to deliver that information. we have the choice of paying cash. we have the choice of not registering. we do not, to one on this dais, has the ability to say i won't go into obamacare. it is mandated by a law that i did not vote for. that the american people did not agree with, but went forward anyway on a purely partisan -- >> mr. chairman? >> -- basis. >> mr. chairman, we're going on -- >> so, therefore, i want the make it very clear, we take serious that the standard for security on the government side must be higher, and today's witnesses will help us begin the process of understanding how it could be higher. i now recognize mr. cummings for his opening statement. >> point of order? >> he is not recognized, gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> mr. chairman, i just want a

point of order, a regular point of order. [inaudible conversations] >> the gentleman is not recognized. the gentleman -- >> i can't be recognized at all. >> the gentleman is not recognized -- >> you've gone on for 15 minutes, i'm just -- point of order. >> the gentleman is not recognized, the gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you're absolutely right, this is a very, very serious hearing, but i think we need to be very careful and be reminded that we have got 110 million americans, our constituents, you say they could use cash at target. a lot of them don't have cash because they don't have jobs. give be me a break. give me a break. it's good to be here this morning. today is the 22nd hearing our committee has held on the affordable care act.

22. we've spent more time on this one issue over the past three years than any other topic. and, mr. chairman, i agree, we want to get this right. this is so very, very important. the consequences of what we do affect all of of our constituents. and there are people watching us right now who are suffering from deadful diseases -- dreadful diseases who are praying and hoping that we get it right. and i am determined to work hard with you to headache -- to make sure that happens. but i'm concerned about them, but i'm also concerned about this 110 million of our constituents who have been placed in a vulnerable position with regard to their target credit cards. and i'm going to go further on

that a little bit later. so where are we today? the law that went into full effect, hello, full effect on january 1st and now millions of people are getting health insurance, they did not have before. they're receiving critical medical care, they have the security of knowing they will not be bankrupt if they get into an accident or get sick. but there's something more important, just as important as all of that. even under those circumstances, they are allowed to live in dignity, dignity. that's what our nation is all about, lifting up each other, so that we all live in dignity. and so this is a phenomenal accomplishment. the law also put into place key protections for consumers, and i'm so glad it did.

i'm so glad. insurance companies are now prohibited from discriminating against people with cancer, our constituents. diabetes and other pre-existing conditions, our constituents, both republican and democrat. both rural and urban. insurance companies may not charge higher prices for women, and millions of people are now receiving free preventive care. that is so important. it is cheaper to keep somebody well than to treat them after they're sick. there are also huge financial benefits. health insurance companies are now sending rebate checks to millions of people. since the law was passed, we have seen the lowest growth in health care costs in 50 years. if we repealed the law today, it

would increase our deficit by more than $1.5 trillion. despite all of these positive results, republicans are still obsessed with killing this law. after more than 40 votes in the house, they shut down the government in an unsuccessful attempt to defund the law, now they've shifted to a new tactic. oh, this is brand new, hot off the press; scaring people away from healthcare.gov web site. everyone agrees that initially the web site's performance was seriously flawed. our committee has a legitimate interest in investigating contractor performance and agency oversight. and we have held multiple hearings on this topic already. but let me pause here for a moment, and i'm just reminded of what emerson said, a favorite quote of mandela. he said, do not, do not be in

fear and fail to act because of your fears and your problems. but be led by your hopes and your dreams. and this is about the hopes and the dreams of americans to stay well, to make sure that their children are well, to make sure that if they get sick, they don't have to go into bankruptcy. that's what this is about, and that's why you're right, mr. hearing -- mr. chairman, this hearing is serious, because it has consequences. in terms of security of the web site, however, it is important to highlight all of the facts instead of cherry picking, i said it, cherry picking, partial information to promote a political narrative that is inaccurate. based on the documents we have reviewed -- and when i say "we,"

i mean republicans and democrats -- and the interviews we've conducted, i believe we can establish several key facts. number one, although some employees express concerns with security testing before this web site was launched, the agency addressed these risks by implementing a strong mitigation plan as part of the authority to operate hem mow that was -- memo that was issued on september 27th. second, since that time the agency has complied successfully with the mitigation plan. the agency has now compelled full end-to-end security testing of the system, and it addressed specific issues that arose in a timely manner. third, witnesses interviewed by the committee praise the current level of security testing. they have described multiple layers of ongoing, robust protection that meet and in some cases exceed federal standards.

as ms. fryer put it during her interview, the agency is using -- and these are your words, ms. fryer, correct me if i'm wrong. ms. fryer said, she's one of our witnesses, she said the agency is using, quote: best practices, mr. chairman, above and beyond that which is usually recommended, end of quote. so, ms. fryer, i hope you clear that up. make us, make it clear to us where you stand. finally, most importantly to date there have been no successful attacks on healthcare.gov by domestic hackers. foreign entities or others who seek to harm our national security. nobody's personal information has been maliciously hacked. now, we need to be careful. obviously, this could change 2007 increasing frequency -- given increasing frequency of attacks against all federal i.t. systems. but the evidence obtained by our

committee, and when i say "our" committee, i mean republicans and democrats, in the case of healthcare.gov is strong, and it keeps getting stronger. in very stark contrast, up to 110 million americans were subjected to one of the most massive information technology breaches in history when their credit, debit and other personal information was compromised at target stores online in november and december. mr. chairman, i sent you a letter on tuesday requesting a hearing on the target breach. and i understand you've agreed to have our staffs meet on this issue next week s and i thank you for that. if our committee can hold dozens of hearings on the affordable care act and on healthcare.gov -- which has not been successfully attacked to date -- surely we can hold at least one hearing at the earliest possible date on the massive target breach that affected more than 100 million of our constituents. as i close, i want to close by

thanking dr. charrest, you've been pulling double duty by providing information to congress in addition to your day job. we thank you. ms. fryer, your name has been thrown around on the house floor, and i'm sure you've heard about it. but you have your opportunity today to clarify what it is, whatever it is you have to say. and mr. baitman, after finishing a daylong interview less than 36 hours ago, you were handed a let inviting you to testify here today, and we thank you. i wallet you all to know that we appreciate -- i want you all to know that we appreciate everything you and your staffs are doing to remain vigilant and constantly monitor the security of the web site. millions of american families thank you for helping them. and with that, mr. chairman, i thank you, and i yield back.

>> i thank the gentleman. i now ask unanimous consent that letters dated december 15th, 2013, from the white house, december 13th -- i'm sorry, december 17th from this committee, e-mail exchanges from december 23rd, january 15th and a letter to secretary sebelius on january 15th be placed in the record and copies be made and distributed. without objection, so ordered. we now go -- oh, and all members may have seven days in which to submit their opening statements and other information. we now welcome our panel of witnesses, mr. kevin charest -- there we go, charest, ph.d., is the chief information security officer at the department of health and human services. ms. teresa fryer is the chief information security officer at the center for medicare and

medicaid services which will undoubtedly be called cms throughout the hearing. and mr. frank baitman is the deputy assistant secretary for information technology and chief information officer at the department of health and human services and, again, i thank you for back-to-back appearances. pursuant to the committee rules, would you, please, rise, raise your right hand to take the oath. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? please be seated. let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. in order to deal with a fairly short period of time, one of our witnesses has a hard stop at twelve which we're going to very much try to respect, and we're likely to have a vote more or less at that time. i want to announce that i will ask you to stay within that five-minute opening statement, and i will be very strict on the

gavel today which is not the history of committee. so we want everyone to ask their questions and complete the questions well prior to five minutes. i won't cut off a witness answering a question, but i will cut off exactly at five minutes a question that's droning on, and i will curtail the answer of questions if, in fact, it is unable to be answered within a short period of time. and i say this because i want to get through all the people on the dais and allow our witnesses to leave timely. additionally, if witnesses need to excuse themselves for a short period of time, please, just go ahead, signal to the clerk, do it and use the facilities back here. other than that, mr. charest, you're recognized. >> good morning, chairman issa, ranking member cummings and members of the committee. my name is kevin charest, and i am the chief information security officer for the or

united states department of health and human services. the department of health and human services is the united states government's principle agency for protecting the health of all americans, providing essential human services especially for those who are least able to help themselves. the hhs office of the secretary and the department's 11 operating divisions administer more than 300 programs covering a wide spectrum of activities. the office of the chief information officer in which i serve is a part of os. our responsibility as one of the staff divisions of os is to manage programs and support the 11 operating acquisitions in carrying out their various and diverse missions. it is important to point out, however, that we manage the department's information technology portfolio through a fed rated governance structure. the vast majority of the county's i.t. reports are tied directly to the appropriations and statutory authorities congress provides directly to our programs and operating divisions. our governance authorities at the os level reflect the federated structure. thus, many of hhs' operation

operating divisions have their own chief informations officer, chief information security office and i.t. structure. the exception of this rule is that os was a department sio performs those responsibilities. hhs' enterprise-wide information security priestles program was launch inside fiscal year 2003 to help protect hhs, including its operating divisions, against threats ask vulnerabilities. including the federal information security managements act. under my leadership i have established a framework to regulate or report incidents involving i.t. security to my office. operating divisions routinely report potential information security incidents to the hhs security incident response center which i oversee. in addition to our internal investigation of all i.t. incidents, we report all incidents to the department of homeland security's computer emergency readiness team at the communications and integration center. through the center, we accept,

triage and collaboratively respond to incidents and disseminates timely notifications regarding current and potential threats and vulnerables. for reference, in fiscal year 2013 we processed approximately 228,700 cyber incidents, an average of more than 620 per day, including federal agencies, critical infrastructure and industry partners. it is important to note that hhs operates the strategy for protecting its assets in accordance with guidance issued by the office of management and budget which has been reflected in hhs' information security policy. this strategy includes the use of risk-based approach to authorizing systems to operate, a robust set of technologies and continuous monitoring of systems, standards and minimum requirements for systems as well -- excuse me -- as well as the proper controls to insure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of all hhs i.t.

assets. consistent with these policies, cms reports actual or suspected security incidents in connection with healthcare.gov to the ccert. the reports are based on the operations security or protection cms has in place to deter and prevent unauthorized access, and weekly penetration testing and security scans of the system. cms' chief information security officer and its information systems security officer are responsible for designing and maintaining a security program to mitigate any risks identified in accordance with fisma. additionally, building on federal guidelines and regulations and in conform chance with industry standards, hhs has career experts including officials from the office of the chief information officer, officer of the inspector general, privacy office, the ccert and key operating divisions to work around the clock to identify, manage, mitigate suspected breaches. in carrying out their work, those teams published in 2008, and hhs's private response team

charter publishes in 2011. hhs security and privacy experts work with appropriate federal government and industry professionals to do the following: validate risk and review and approve response plans, review and approve communications notice to affected individuals, perform analysis on data in order to recommend strategies to effectively refine or improve the department's defense or a potential loss of pii. implementing private and security solutions that can reduce the potential loss, and finally, monitor the privacy and security environment to raise awareness of threats to pii within the d.. if the team determines that a notice of breach is warranted, the office coordinates to send letters to the affected consumers or businesses informing them of the breach. i appreciate the opportunity to meet with you today and discuss your interest in the federal government's i.t. security practices. >> thank you. ms. fryer? >> chairman issa, ranking member

cummings and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak about my role in protecting the security of the federally-facilitated marketplace, also known as ffm. as a career civil servant, i have decades of experience in information security not only at cms, but also at nasa, the u.s. fish and wildlife service, office of personnel management and 20 years at security positions in the navy. in my current role as chief information security officer for cms, my responsibilities include issuing cms information security policy, insuring the cms systems comply with applicable laws and regulations and providing oversight to maintain the confidentiality, integrity and availability of all cms information and information systems. cms has a long track record of successfully securing and protecting almost 200 complex i.t. systems related not only to ffm, but also to medicare, medicaid and the children's health insurance program.

in my role at cms, i lead the team that is responsible for overseeing the independent security control assessments of cms systems including the ffm. these are conducted to assess the effectiveness of the security controls that cms has implemented in the agency's information systems. independent security contractors completed a security control assessment of the ffm on december 18th with no open high findings. this security control assessment meant all industry standards was an end-to-end test and was conducted in a stable environment and allowed for testing to be completed in the allotted timement given -- time. given the positive results of the recent security controls assessment, the ability to complete comprehensive security testing and a mitigation plan in place, i would recommend the ffm to be given a new authority to operate when the current authority expires in march. the ffm authorization to operate that is currently in place has a number of strategies to insure

the ffm is protected against attacks and mitigation risks, and mitigates risks including regular testing that includes -- that exceeds best practices and a requirement to perform a full security controls assessment within 90 days of the launch. the risk mitigation strategies and compensating controls that were prescribed are being implemented and executed as planned. the protections that we have in place, put in place have successfully prevented attacks. there have been no successful security it is attacks on the fd no person or group has maliciously accessed personally-identifiable information. as part of this mitigation plan, cms established a dedicated security team, of which i am a member, to monitor, track and insure the activities in the ato memo are completed. this team is responsible for the weekly testing of quites and internet-facing web servers and scans using continuous monitoring tools.

ongoing vulnerability assessmentings of the ffm network infrastructure and internet-facing web service are conducted through penetration testing which involve simulated attacks to breach the web site and continuous monitoring of marketplace-related systems to alert security professionals of any new vulnerables that may exist due to recent changes or maintenance. information from these tests have enabled us to prevent any successful attacks on the ffm. while no serious security professional will ever guarantee that any system is hack proof, i am confident based on the recent security controls assessment and the durable security protections in place that the ffm is secure. in many i instances we have gone above and beyond what is required with penetration testing. cms takes system security very seriously. my job is to anticipate and detect any possible security threat to our many systems no matter how small.

we continue to carry out this responsibility, protecting the ffm, to insure that consumers can use the system with confidence that their personal information is secure. thank you, and i'm happy to take your questions. >> thank you. and because we were not provided your opening statement, what date was that security assessment that causes you to recommend completed? >> it was completed on december 18th. >> december 18th. >> i'm sorry -- yes, it was completed december 18th. >> thank you. statement. mr. baitman. >> good morning, chairman issa, ranking member cummings and members of the committee. my name is frank baitman, and i'm deputy assistant secretary for information technology and the chief information officer at the u.s. department of health and human services. while i appreciate the committee's interest in healthcare.gov, as you know, two days ago i spent eight hours in a transcribed interview with committee staff and with you and

representative jordan respectively answering your questions. i received the committee's invitation to testify at today's hearing approximately 36 hours ago at the close of tuesday's transcribed interview. i will do my best to answer think questions you still have given the minimal time i've had to prepare. i'd like to make clear to the committee the role of my office, that is the office of the chief information officer for the department of health and human services, in healthcare.gov. i personally and my office generally have very little visibility into the development and operational oversight for the web site. the department manages its i.t. portfolio through a federated governance structure. most of hhs' operating divisions have their own chief information officer and chief information security officer, one of whom is with us today. as well as their own i.t. management structure.

the vast majority of the department's i.t. resources are directly tied to appropriations made to you are programs and -- to our programs and operating provisions, and our governance structure reflects this reality. management and governance of healthcare.gov were comparable to the management of similar i'll t. initiatives throughout the department's 11 operationing divisions. and as with medicare part d prescription drug program, the development and security of health care dot governor web site has been -- healthcare.gov web site has been led by cms which is the business owner for the system. neither i, nor my office had operational control over or responsibility for health care healthcare.gov. since i joined the department less than two years ago, we've been working to restructure and update our i.t. governance to bring greater visibility into what the d. buys -- the department buys and builds across all of our 11 operating divisions. we're in the process of putting in place three i.t. steering

committees to bring together technology and program leaders from across the department to improve our purchasing and management of information technology resources. with respect to healthcare.gov specifically, i'd like to reiterate something that i've described to the committee on a number of occasions during my transcribed interview on tuesday. any discussions that i had regarding the rollout and launch of the web site were based upon my past experiences in the private sector. and the practices of tech companies that are often used, i did not have any personal, direct or detailed knowledge of the development or security of the web site, so it would not have been appropriate for me to make recommendations on operational decisions and accordingly, i did not. ..

>> they are all from the report that was not published, and as they put up a slide i want to first -- this particular slide, these slides were provided to us after we initially interviewed you. this was a memo never sent. would you please tell us why this memo was never sent? >> so, this was a memo that i initially was drafting this into the chief information officer -- >> right. and you chose not to send it because of --