on the ground, not by negotiators in europe. >> assure you would have liked a been a file low wall and the conversation yesterday between president obama and president and on the phone, but how do you think that way? says. >> you have had a time of of three months with his been the degree of american russian cooperation with some success to start the processing that the chemical weapons out of syria and routed towards elimination. that cooperation on that one part of the syrian problem should not disguise the fact that when you're talking about the broader future of syria their big differences between the way the united states as a future version and the russians. the russians don't want to see the sort of tossed out. they also see him as representing a degree of stability. from their point of view the west is none of a good answer to

the question. they can imagine scenarios that from their perspective are much worse. and certainly i think with the military success they seem to be having, they're feeling more confident in backing their guy. my guess is that we're not going to see a lot of convergence between washington and moscow last to what comes out of this geneva to conference even if they cooperate fairly successfully on the narrow piece >> we are going to turn all of you. are there microphone's around? microphones about. raise your hand when you get the microphone. please tell us who you are. please actually put a question marked the end of a question. it will start with this june than right here. >> right here.

>> hi. have a question. you're talking about u.s. giving incentives. could you elaborate of what you think the incentive would be? in the other, what you think would be the new approach for political rebalance in the new year church. obviously the criticism. end very optimistic about the rebalancing strategy well received, but at your competing organizations, 37% to commit far more correctly, said that the plan was well designed to a poorly implemented. 39 percent said poorly designed. so obviously very different from what you describe. look to be concluded as soon as

expected in especially in the congress. >> i think it is fair to say that in retrospect in the early years of the rebalance policy it was significantly over sold by some of the proponents that advocated. that said, the essence of it, i think, as jeff and i tried to argue in our paper makes sense. it makes sense because it is a framework political economic and security that the united states would wish to operate in this most dynamic region. the problems, of course, are ones, number one, of dynamics in the region that have undermined the overall context within which states interact. many of the u.s. problems in terms of the dysfunctional our own government process, preoccupations that among other things constrained in prevented president obama from traveling

to the region not so long ago, although no he has reschedule the trip for asia. so the issue of the end of the day is whether the policy can be based on the return of zero broad principles or whether you need a sense of on going, sustain the engagement and movement to get where you want to go. i don't think that the mood is all that here. even if you take something like the trans-pacific partnership. probably the targets that were laid out or overly ambitious in terms of the filling of the agreement. and the other hand, i think that china's government looks at this in a much more measured way no. the initial instinct was this is , if you will, anti china, but i don't think that is what it was intended to do. so really the longer term proof of the policy will not be a kind of a one-shot deal. as to be something more fundamental that will it be

revealed in time rather than some kind of bold, dramatic gesture. because really what is the alternative for the united states or anyone else to record a you find a framework within which states can both compete but also cooperate or you have a far this year region with all kinds of dangers and risks that i don't think anyone seriously would wish to contemplate. this puts the united states obviously in a very complicated position as it tries to move ahead, but we can see that a lot of the practical changes and challenges are much more manifest now and then it has to be demonstrated that through words, not only three speeches, but also through a capacity to really solve critical problems. on that i think the verdict is still out. >> the zillow a right back here. caught theft.

>> there is no chapter about europe in there. i was wondering. everything is drab and boring. with the european parliament elections, we could have for the first of the majority right wing of left-wing. the parliament which would turn the parliament and to an even more dysfunctional organization which would it stop here american ambitions to consider to initiation deals. more generally speaking, what do you think that the president's use to the bigger opportunity of engaging with europe? you was that popular. heat is really, really very unpopular now in europe. some short comments on that.

>> who was to handle the european issue. >> with the gritty look at the biggest question for your the sorts of issues you talk about the then the easy ones were an american presidency. i can use these levers to impact on. even if he were to say that the 110 cluster rickrack election in an allied air partners state. i think there really was nothing that you could write that would fit in with the context of the recommendations. to the extent to make does appear in number of cases, for example, when we talk about how you deal with russia as a partner, you need to work with russia and in some cases in knowledge and that the success of leverage will be greatly increased if you can be of the same page with your. >> bruce wanted to speak on that. that may build on that question. it struck me ifs that the

biggest outflow of the snow and revelations when traveling in europe have been more economic than double back. yakima they're unhappy with the bush administration, the obama administration just as they were unhappy before for very different reasons. but it strikes me that all this discussion of segmenting the internet to watch your whether you want to buy american products because the intelligence agencies may have built-in back doors, that could have a longer-term impact on less than whatever the diplomatic of los. >> sure. i think that the snowdon affair illustrates something very important about presidencies. you don't control the world. you don't control events. in this case president obama found the first year of his

second term in maybe the entire four years have been to a certain degree hijacked by a very young contract employee of booz allen decided to spill the beans on american as the nuys activities around the world. and there is not much that the president can do to pull it back. it is all out there, and morris dahlia all the time. he can try to present his point of view of who edwards though ms. cohen that he is a thief to the that he may be a trader in may be a defector, but he is a will to push back. he will be on tv again tomorrow. it is an illustration of the fundamental points you made it the beginning about the limits of power, not just in the united states but of the american presidency in general. it may come back and look at the second obama administration and say that it was undermined by an event by an individual entirely out of his control which

reminders of the second russian ministration which was in many ways destroyed by error came that the president no control over. his response to the hurricane was inept, what @booktv did not comptroller cain. on the broader question, you're absolutely right. it is the perception in europe that the national security agency is listening to every phone conversation, watching every twit, reading every text message. all of that is ridiculous. the nsa would have to have maybe two or 3 million employees to be able to read all that stuff. that would be a monumental waste of american tax dollars. that is the perception that is out there it is hard to push it back and it creates a dynamic in european politics that is now working guest this in a very serious way about things like the u.s. eu economic trade

agreement. >> there is the perception that high-tech american companies cooperate. is potentially damaging to overseas countries to now say, welcome the man who we do want to deal with those. >> and some of them have clearly >> exactly. in one of -- we don't have the authors on the stage, all of the big steps year was can the president get out in front of this in a way that would position them both to try to menace the damage suits but also protect american companies are working to preserve the internet that so far has been a very successful prefer american economic interests. >> and one more. could you imagine a situation in which the president comes to the conclusion hosting mr. snowden is no longer in his deep interest of his gun lobby once and someone shows up at his door until some this plan is ready? >> no, i don't think so.

remember, he said is to force that is for reviews and the intelligence services. for whatever reason the russians turned snowdon back to the u.s. or boot him out, what lessons does that send to any potential defector that the russians might help to look in the future? will they give him back, maybe they would give me back. i think that would be a sort of measure that he would not want to take to make the right more complicated for his intelligence folks. >> right back here. >> i have a question related to afghanistan and metastasizing. i think americans are perplexed because they see al qaeda in syria, yemen. they see the concentration in pakistan. what is our real interest in maintaining a large force in

afghanistan with respect to these other policies? >> you touched on this a little bit before. >> first of all, you're talking about something like 10,000. or not talking about maintaining a force afghanistan anywhere is to defeat -- significantly deteriorated in the chances are hard to have hardly negligible. i think there's. this will enable the return of terrorist activity in two ways. there is first of physical possibility of safe haven for terrorist groups with global reach an international ambitions. u.s. three in the did not answer but negotiations with the taliban.

to what extent is that tell a ban separable from al qaeda? is it purely domestic reoriented or is it inevitably linked to al qaeda in ways that it cannot break the chains? my view is that it is domestically oriented. nonetheless it owes a lot of debts. and so for it to completely sever relationships would be difficult. at the same time they clearly realize that it was booted out of afghanistan because of al qaeda. senior leaders have said that al qaeda was the play that they brought on to their rule. it would try to play a game of providing support for al qaeda but that is now being that they would really limit all engagement. so there is the issue of physical security, but the other issue is the imagery, the psychological boost that this

would give to other federalist groups. this would be the second time six when the great power was defeated. and there might not be any physical cooperation, but there might still be a sense that sufficient violence may lend cruelty and that the support groups, that does not mean we should fight every terrorist group bear river and the world. certainly does not mean we should deploy grows everywhere, but it does mean we need to calculate very carefully we're dangerously overextended. at the end the leverage will be critically about us being selective about commitments but also the delivery on commitments in the molding the threats and

promises that we have made. >> okay. >> just to expand the question because i think some of the issues that were raised with respect to al qaeda have parallels in the broader and released. you and your question noted we see al qaeda popping out. and certainly there are affiliate's president and a number of sponsoring the middle east. there are also a lot of localized violent extremists in for one reason or another may see an advantage in embracing the al qaeda brand. but whose concerns, sources of support, and targets are primarily localized. it is important that the united states, as it parses these threats continued to carefully make the distinctions and differentiation is. as i look at where the

trajectory of u.s. policy is headed in our merrilies across north africa syria, an error or and down into human cut where we don't have a clear orientation toward the broad transformation that is occurring in the arab middle east, but we have all lot of worries about specific things that we see, including violent extremism. there is danger that in responding day-by-day to those urgent security imperatives, we in debris creating special to the process of the paradigm that president obama came into office wanting to dismantle the of the sort of broad scale war on terrorism that drives our policy and drives the way we are perceived in the region in terms of where restructure our

relationships in the region that is undergoing tremendous change. while there are real threats commit is important for us to be able to distinguish what is local, what is transnational, is targetting the estimate was not. i would live to hear the views on that. >> i want to come back to the metamorphosis of al qaeda. we have seen as a result of the arab awakening in what as, on that al qaeda had a rebirth. erotically it came exactly at the moment that the obama administration policy against al qaeda corporation was out al qaeda produced its greatest success. i am fully in agreement with everything that was said about the importance of keeping an american presence and ask him to -- afghanistan. the administration is unable to make the real case to the american people which is the reason we need to and does the

american troops is to continue the drone war in pakistan. that is the vital national-security interest. we don't want to see al qaeda court in pakistan rebuild like we saw al qaeda rebuild. the drones are not the answer to the problem. there are surely have very good weapon to having your hand. my concern is that the united states gives up the weapon by having no basis for operation after 2014. we will see al qaeda in pakistan rebuild and regenerate as fast as we saw every generate. >> is there an alternative out here? let's say we did lose the main base in afghanistan. is there an alternative either firm ship or elsewhere in the region given the extended reach

that you would necessarily need to launch them? >> the short answer is no. the technology is not there. does your roofie does not change. you can launch from operations of the northern part of pakistan where al qaeda operates from afghanistan to mayor ron, india. u.s. and from the arabian sea they're likely to be as unsuccessful as desert one was. the irony here is it is a covert operation. it's a covert operation that everyone talked about that you can go websites and see every attack played out. but because it's a covert operations, the administration has its hands tied that it will lead to run a public and say the real reason we wanted thousand guys is to work al qaeda in pakistan. >> okay. right here. up front.

>> charlie devonshire from brookings. since we have our middle east and asian experts here, i'd like to ask the following question which relates to our geopolitical posture in the gulf and elsewhere. to you feel that the state's and the oil-producing states to as the middle east specialists to have dealt with what is implied by the fact that increasingly the a wall of and demand for oil and gas in the gulf is going to be in danger in not europe and then they began to think about how that is going to choose their strategic posture with the asian nations that will be the bulk of the revenues? likewise, for those of you are asian experts to do you think that south korea, for example, japan a concern that come in yet, others have come to terms that as they become more and more import dependent that they have to assume a strategic posture to protect the sea lanes

in their access and that they cannot count on americans to do it. and i went, this is why i did not necessarily agree with that kind of a continuation of american policy in the region because our strategic interests will lie elsewhere. >> i will kick it off briefly because i just came back from the gulf. and so of had a chance to hear from folks about this directly. i guess i was a couple things. some of this piece over the talks and so on the bridge was to febris was talking about, there's an underlying anxiety there which is about exactly the point you're making. what are u.s. and dress in our region where we are used to having the security guarantor in an error or you don't need our

energy anymore. the rest of the world is free riding on the american investment. so that underlying anxiety is to and from the recognition of this brought shift in their recognition in the most honest moments that they don't actually have a mechanism for maintaining regional order themselves without an extra great power. they have never done it. they don't have the capacity themselves. we have tried in various ways to help build up that capacity, but it is nowhere near there. i think they'd knowledge also that from their perspective, the chinese are the indians are other rising powers the release to couple decades away for having the capability to take on any kind of role like that, even if they're interested in doing so. so they feel deep-seated anxiety that maybe the u.s. is turning

away then there is no alternative. nerco my own view is that i don't think we are turning away. in many ways because of the crises in the region but also because our enduring interest we're kind of bail to the ground the broader trend that you were describing is one that i think will continue to raise questions >> one of the concerns you hear in the region is it really is a deal then they're free to go often become the kind of power in the region that it imagines itself to be bob. first door to the gulf state posture. deprenyl in insecure which reflects both their capacity but also the world you there is in great from centuries of

relationships with outside greater powers. and starting this sort of this course is always existing. the free rider issue has always existed. we have never been more dependent than most of our primary allies our economic partners. we have a major security commitment at a time when europe was far more dependent on bel fact was that we were. i believe that it is central to the american vision of itself as a superpower to maintain an investment in the free and reasonable, reliable flow of energy from the major producers of energy around the world which will endorse a long as we maintain our commitment to being a world superpower. terms of the question of how broad factors in, it is an important issue because the negotiations tighten all of these insecurities and fears,

but ultimately there really is the outcome that will lead to the revival as either regional strategic power or regional economic power checks. the nuclear negotiations are wholly on likely under which the nuclear negotiations lead to the lifting of the comprehensive u.s. embargo on the wrong which is the major hit on investment, particularly for the energy sector and for technology. the fact that they have not been able to access the lng is why today almost a net importer of gas despite having so the largest gas reserves in the world. despite being one of the early adapters to trans regional gatt trade. so you have a situation in which the loss as a result distinction, the constraints will remain in place for the

foreseeable future despite some prospect if there is a final deal on the declare issue that the rest of the war will begin to come back. >> of the offer a few thoughts. it does seem to me in various ways draw all the states are mindful of how, to use a mixed metaphor, the ground is shifting , that the very fact of diminished u.s. dependence raises questions about whether the united states over the longer haul despite is interested in having that sense of there being a global order and this state that the u.s. has in the global comments that over time we would see some kind of diminution of american involvement or that others would have to in some measure pick up the slack. the problem is i don't even among those who are most aware what their energy security brigade as the they're going to

beat a very long-term process. but if look in the longer term sense that think that is very, very likely where we're headed. the chinese are now making a commitment to a carrier program. it will lobby massive, but any carrier pro gram in sales huge commitments of money to end the ability to conceptualize a larger sense of strategy. the involvement that not only chinese interests but the interest of others should be involved as well. the other side is looking for other alternatives other land-based. you see this in northeast asia defensive end of means by which with japan, korea, and china they can be a much more substantial energy res supplier. there are some extent already. are sitting in the shoes of a

regional leader our looking for as many alternatives as i could i would not be permissible policy and over the long run the united states would be prepared or are able to do this on its own. >> we have time for one more quick question in one quick answer. the and they write there. microphone is coming to you. >> the key for giving me the opportunity. i was like for us to focus on the ukraine once more please. how can we avoid the nightmare scenario in the ukraine? me say that the u.s. response has been negligent or minimal. what should this administration do? thank you. >> the first point that has to be understood is that this crisis is going to be resolved first and foremost by the ukrainians in ukraine. i think the thing that the united states and europe could be doing now and should be doing now is trying to apply pressure

to insure the authorities to avoid use of force. to go beyond that -- history the u.s. government said that the thesis of those they had been connected with the use of force had been revoked, but i recommend going beyond that and saying targets of the potential the cessations to say we're trying to encourage the government to give it to a good faith negotiations that includes compromise to address some of the opposition's concerns here.

my mid being distributed yesterday and take. take home with you. i look forward to seeing at the end of the year how many of these turned out. reminding you each -- [laughter] thanks, again. thank you all. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] tomorrow morning on c-span2 fbi director give the keynote speech at the conference of the national sheriff's association. our live coverage begins at 9:00 eastern. at 10:30 republican national committee chairman speak at the rnc winter meeting in washington. you can watch events live on c-span2 or on our website c-span.org.

it continues on the road. on the campaign trail and visiting book festivals, history events, education conferences, and schools. look for us on the road and online on our website c-span.org. you can also follow us on twitter. all brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. the secretary of housing and urban this is just over an hour. [inaudible] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] okay. good morning. good morning. we're going call the meeting to order. folks can take their seats. we have a pretty full agenda this morning for this particular committee. i'm the chair of committee development and housing for the u.s. conference of mayors. i want to welcome you all here joining us our committee members as well as who are joining us outside the committee. also, i want to welcome c-span in to our meeting. we're very pleased that we are

able to talk to a wide audience this morning. we have a few items on our agenda this morning. i want to begin with secretary donnavan, and we're going hear from city committee development director bob. and we're going hear from the brookings institute all flee speakers this morning have substantiative presentations and question and answer for this morning. before we begin, i want to make sure you know our -- the vice chairs are. mayor ed allentown, pennsylvania. and ralph becker of salt lake city. who i think will be joining us momentarily. we'll start with secretary donnavan and move through our agenda this morning. just one note, because you all

know how important cdbg funds are before i introdpiews the secretary, and i want to get this out before we start the meeting. we're pleased, obviously, with the good news in fy14cdbg funding we were hearing previously. we know it's up to all of us to really be aggressive and talking to members of congress and the senate how important this program is. i want to mention two things while the secretary is here. we're asking committee members to participate in between now and the spring. this year is the 40th anniversary of cdbg funds. it's been one of the most successful programs in history as far as funding housing, economic development,

assessability. we want to make sure we communicate around the importance of the program. what we are asking you members of the committee and member of the conference to commit to highlighting successful czbg projects. in your community between now and may. we have, as you know, in our committee meeting in las vegas, we now have a website u.s. conference of mayors where we're asking you all to upload highlight from the event as well as the community partners that help make cdbg so successful and productive. we want you to upload that on our web page the u.s. conference of mayors.

we will send it out. it will couple nate with an event on capitol hill that will do in the spring with members of congress and the senate. i'm announcing that now. i want to get your commitment. i'll stop you before you walk out of the room and make sure you join us for that. we have to make sure we protect this program. so with that, as i said, the good news that cdbg is funding at 3.-- in fy14. the house appropriations committee had recommended funding at 1.6 billion. so we're pleased that did not happen. all of this work that we've done in collaboration with hud is extremely important in the implementation of funds. and introducing secretary shaun

donovan. you know he's been a fantastic partner to all of us. the door is always open. very assessable, and he's really, i think, pushing for what we're pushing for which is outcome and innovation with the use of the funds. it's been a real pleasure working with you, secretary, and i know many of the mayors and solving problems at the ground level we're pleased you're here and sharing your time with us. i'll introduce secretary shaun donovan. thank you for being here. [applause] thank you. it's great to be back with you. i want to start by thanking the committee for his incrediblability leadership. we've gotten to spend a lot of time together. not just through his leadership of this committee, but also, you know, i got a call for saying i got a call. what he's not just talking the

talk. he's walking the walk doing things that are innovative and new. i want to thank you for your leadership. i also want to say thanks to ralph becker for their leadership as well. you have done remarkable work. i'm always impressed with what your doing. i really appreciate it. i see lots of familiar faces around the table. i see some new faces. congratulations to all of you that are just stepping in to your roam as new mayor or relatively recent mayors. before i jump in to the work that hud does, i want you to know a little bit about me, and that i come from where you all live. my job was working for a mayor. i was a housing commissioner new york city. and one of the thicks that i

fundamentally understand -- and i understand that whatever we may do or not do here in d.c., and there's been a lot of not doing lately, you have to get your jobs done. you're where the rubber hits the road. and what i'm drn one of the things i want to e show you, i'm wearing my new york city manhole cover cuff links today. [laughter] and they are my favorite cuff links because they remind me why i'm here. that ultimately if the suer system doesn't work, the snow doesn't get employee -- plowed some of my recent friends in the northeast know what i'm talking about. things don't work. and you're on the frontlines are in. i want you to know that not just for me personally, but for my

whole team at hud. many of whom come out of local government. we get what you're dealing with and the work you need to do. i hope you have seen it over the last five years. we made a lot of progress at hud. but we've also got a ways to go as well. please work with us. give me the good feedback. give me the bad feedback in term behalf is not working. i would enjoy you in particular to get to know your regional administrator for hud. we are ten around the country. we have a full team in place i just added three more in various places around the country. they are great resources for you. stick with our team, understand with a we do. let's build that working relationship. having said that, let me deal with a number of things i know are on your mind, and i'm going to start right where he started

which is talk about -- i get that ultimately cdbg -- i don't want to leave them are incredibly important resources. i have the largest cdbg home budgets in my country at my agency. i understand how critical they are. and one of the reasons i do want to make sure we focus on them sometime it is doesn't get the same attention, and we should recognize that we work with 650 of you across the country. those are the participating jurisdiction. we created 1.1 million affordable housing units across the country. in addition to that 283,000 people have been able to get rental assistance, and i think particularly at the time -- this is something it's important we keep hammering home.

for every dollar we put in the programs, we leverage $4 from somewhere else. so at the time when we're talking about, you know, fiscal deficits. that's bang for the buck. it's an argument we ought to be making time and time again. now, unfortunately, these programs have been squeezed. if you think about the fact that it is down almost 50% cdbg about 25% from when our fiscal crisis started. so these programs have been squeezed as much as just about anything else. as said, i think it is a big victory for all of us, and i will tell you i have over the five year -- i have never seen better work than i saw this year partnership between our agency and all of you to really make the case for cdbg.

i give you a lot of credit, your fearless leaders a ton of credit. really marbling the team and making the case this year. when you go from 1.6 billion in the house bill to 3 billion, that is a real victory. i would love to see us back up where we were a few years ago, but it is a real victory in the times that we're dealing with. but i also think it's important that we show we are thinking in innovative ways, creative ways, that we're looking at common sense smart reforms to the programs. that will help us make the case even better. and so this past year, many of you were involved, but particularly new folks may not have been aware of this, but we started a dialogue we called moving cdbg forward. we had 20 different listening sessions with all of you, with grantees, other stakeholders to

get your ideas about smart reform, how with can stream line, simplify the programs, make them work better, and make sure we can make the arguments that we are using the dollars effective and accountable way as possible. and, you know, unfortunately. you may be aware of this. we had a "washington post" series on the home program that was very unfair. but really cost us. it's easy for these programs if we can do 100 good things and the one thing that isn't working as well gets puts in the press. we have to make sure we're vigilant on this and show we are using the dollars wisely. you should expect to see in our 2015 budget a set of proposals around those ideas that came out of the listening sessions. we want to -- and i want to be clear, we're not saying those are ideas we're done talking. we want that to be the beginning

of the next stage in the conversation which is to really say how do we make cdbg as effective as we can. look, someful these decisions are tough. we are down to numbers now with some of our participating jurisdictions where we're talking about 30, 40, 50, $60 ,000. it's almost impossible for you to all figure out to run a program for that. just hiring the staff to run it can cost you more than you're getting. we have to find creative ways to think about partnering together and doing other things to help us make these as effective as possible. solet not only fight but also fight to make the program as effective as possible. second thing i want to touch on the fantastic work that we've all done together around homelessness. in 2010, this president launched

an initiative we call opening doors. and this was the first time the federal government has said we're going have a strategic plan not just to put a band aid on the problem but end homelessness. we set clear goals we were going to end chronic and veteran's homelessness and family and children homelessness by the end of 2020. because we worked together in very innovative ways, approach like rapid rehousing that was small amount of money, sometimes it's just one month's rent for a security deposit. we get folks quickly in to housing. it works. we're seeing close to 90% of the families who just that small amount of money are successfully housed a year later. very innovative. housing first is another strategy very effective that so many of you are implementing. we have worked very nard particular to strengthen our partnership with veteran

affair. and try to make sure bringing together the housing resources with the health care, the other support that the va can provide. ultimately it shows the results. during a time when we would see homelessness skyrocket. not only do we have difficult economic circumstances over the last few years for so many families. many long and hundreds of thousand of veterans coming back from overseas. we've been able to push down family homelessness by 8% in the last flee years, chronic homelessness by 16%, and veteran's homelessness by 24% in three years. so really, really impressive work. i want to say there are a set of places, cities, and towns around the country that are doing spectacular work on this. and i don't see ralph here yet,

guatemala i want -- but i want to call out mayor stanton in phoenix, mayor becker in salt lake city. they made a challenge to each other they were going to get every single chronically homeless vet off the street. both have done that. it's one step forward ending veteran homelessness completely. and so we're seeing where you make this a priority. work with us to bring creative resources, you can do remarkable thing. ly say this, at the time when our trust deficit in government, particularly the federal government is just as bad as our fiscal deficit. to be able to say to an american that we have gotten our heroes off the street is a powerful way to say government works. we can do stuff together during the federal and local level. it makes a different in people's

lives. i want to make sure that we're working together. we're going to be coming back to you asking you to make commitment about you can do to end veteran's homelessness and other forms of homelessness. particularly chronic homelessness. we have a real focus. stay tuned. we want your partnership and to step up and do more on this. it's important to recognize that so often what you will see in a federal partner is, you know, it feels like 18 different agencies with a 100 different program paps lot of times we're not so good at being able to deliver those things in a way that you really understand how they come together and one plus one doesn't equal two.

and so one of the thicks i've been very focused on is how do we create better partnerships across the federal agencies that come together at the neighborhood level i want to touch on three specific efforts near and dear to my heart and the president's heart. first, many of you know, in fact, son-in-law -- some of you grabbed me. you know about our choice neighborhood effort. it's the successor to the very successful home six program. i was just in seattle over the last couple of days looking at one of our first five choice neighborhoods. they're doing remarkable stuff bringing together housing, new light rail mind. just remarkable work.

well, just a couple of weeks ago, the president announced we were taking this to the next level with something we call. and the basic idea is what we're doing is bringing together a set of what we call our signature community development nirves. choice neighborhoods at hud. you look at kids literally from the time they're in the cradle all the way until they have a career and matching them up with the help they need. not just in school, but throughout the community. that is an effort part of it. our criminal just -- make sure we're bringing public safety in to this. we're bringing it together and pacifically put them on steroids. and what does it mean? we picked the first five.

we're going to pick at least 15 more during the rest of the administration. we're asking congress to give us tax credit for hiring and business development there. sort of building on the effort. we're also going give those communities advantages for more than 20 different other competitive programs. we're going put in place a topnotch federal team from all the key agencies on the ground in that community that is going to make sure they are getting the help they need. i talked about. the partnership. we're going bring technical assistance and vista volunteers. all of that is absolutely key. and i want to be -- a lot of different pieces to this. what i want to make sure we're clear about what is the goal is. the president said this we he announced it last week. we have too many communities of

concentrated poverty around this country where no matter how well a kid does in school. no matter how hard their parents work. the single most determinant of the life chances and lifespan is the zip code. it's just wrong. we can't let kids growing up in neighborhoods stieflt their dreams. and so we have to make sure we're bringing all the resources we can together to help do this. you may say, well, 20 isn't enough. i agree. we're picking many of the finalists and doing more work with them. we're doing to neighborhood and promise neighborhoods in many more neighborhoods than those 20. second, at the city level, we

have our strong city strong community effort. we need ten cities originally just last week, we announced an expansion of this. and basically the idea here is that a city level the same we're doing in the neighborhood level. we're going bring if your issue is expanding your airport and helping the neighborhoods near there like in memphis, if it's a port issue, you have, you know, a serious problem with food, and jobs as chester, pennsylvania, if it's redeveloping the downtown mall as in fence -- friends know. whatever your key economic challenges are. we're going bring the right folks to tit in your -- fit in your office.

not everybody will be a strong city strong community partner. we know we can take some of the best practices and change the way we're working overall. an example, we're going create in the next few weeks. we're going to announce the national resource network. one of the thing i hear from you, look, i have to know what are the best partners and the best cities around the country doing on this particular issue. i want to know what sin elevative, what are the best practices, this is a team of folks that you can draw on that are the best practitioners around the country to come to your city and help you design what you're looking to do that innovative. technical assistance, the best practice is. we're going set it up not to go

through some long contracting process. we have the folks on retainer basically. you say, look, i need help with issue. we'll get a team there to help you. third and finally i want to touch on our partnership for sustainable community at the regional level. we have joined together with the department of transportation, epa, with the department of agricultural and rural areas, and we have funded 143 planning grant. some at the local level, some at the regional level that help you better connect transportation, infrastructure to housing. there are great examples salt lake city having done that. there are so many other cities that are doing that. with the 143 planning grants we have reached half the american population.

and it's starting to not just better drive growth and development, connect up housing transportation infrastructure. it's also lowering costs for your citizens. frption is getting to be more expensive than housing. when you put them together average american spends 52 cents of every dollar they earn on transportation. if we can help drive down the cost and make your neighborhood more attractive. create better places to live, you all know that's a huge part of economic competitiveness right now. more and more; right. if you can create a more livable city. not just driving but light rail, walkable communities, exciting downtown things happening or in satellite areas. those are the kinds of things that we're planning on. it's really our economic development strategies.

so the key for us is how do we take your plan and put them in reality. one of the great thing we got done in the budget this year. is a big new infusion in tiger grant dollars in the department of transportation. so often that's the implementation money you need. we're looking a the the range of other sources opportunities to implement the plans that we're doing. i can go on for a little bit longer on the stuff we're doing. those are a few highlight of the things i'm excited about in working with you on. i want to make sure we have time to hear from all of you and what else might be on your mind. let me close by saying thank you. where i started this is that you all are where is innovation is happening. you are where the rubber needs the road across our country. more and more i'm incredibly impressed with the quality of the work the mayors are doing to

make greet neighborhoods and places. we to be art paf you in doing that. thank you. [applause] we should open it up for questions. thank you, secretary. >> thank you. thank you for the work you do on the committee. i want to thank the committee for coming here and doing what he's doing. on a personal note, mr. secretary, i said it a few years ago, your leadership has been incredible. we have seen a lot of changes in term of seability in your office. for getting things solved.

which is always problem. moving to what i bring up almost every year that's how how entitlement community receive funds. t the one place where entitlement communities receive dollars for those who may not trealdz directly from the federal government. it goes around the normal dollars go to state and county first. every mayor knows how important it is. you know where the rubber meets the road. you know what you need when things happen. >> not that we don't love our governors. >> not that we don't love our governors. the money has a funny way at not exactly going at the same rate and matter. >> i've never experienced that in new york. i want to say on the hazard mitigation funds. those, unlike normal entitlements sometimes even entitlement communities don't find their way directly to.

maybe there's a way to do it through a resolution here. but maybe draw tighter guideline in the realm. in emergencies when it's probably most important the none flows right. we are not circumventing some things that really would be helpful in term of that money flowing exactly like it does in normal times. mayos know when an emergency occurs. they're the folks who are the innovators and frankly, in a world now where met throw economies run things. i would like to see the money flow better in the emergency situations. thank you. unfortunately i've had the duty over the last five years to spend a lot of time on natural disasters, and we've seen you

can argue about the science, but i'll i'm telling you when you look at the eye of the a family that has been hit bay tornado or hurricane. i'll never forget two sisters i met in alabama. on a visit who were searching for their mom's pictures and her stuff just scattered through their neighborhood. it is a terrible thing. folks aren't asking abstract questions about climate change and asking how can we recover and protect our community. i do think that this point of whether the money twos is very important. we have, for the first time ever, no administration has done it before. we have taken the ctbg money and awarded it directly to jurisdictions for the first time.

as mayor mad docks knows. he's been a beneficiary of that. we don't always get the formula right exactly. we are willing to listen and go back and make sure we do that. one of the challenges is capacity. we want to make sure we have jurisdictions that are getting 500 times more money than they've gotten before. we are making direct awards to city and counties to make sure they are able to benefit. the problem on a lot of fema dollars like mitigation their rules are much stricter than cdbg was flexible. we have been able to get congress get us even more flexibility in recent rounds on the dr money.

it would take changing the staff to make progress on some of the fema dollars. you know how likely it is to get something from congress these days. i think it's important if you want to be surgical about that. if you have some very specific changes to bring that farred. i would be happy to work with you. to focus on that. secretary, what we can do, mayor is also we can sort of follow up there's a group of mayors from the committee that are interested in going to the second level of the question. perhaps question connect with the appropriate staff from whatever agency and see what our next steps might be. if i can be the bad guy.

one more question. we have two other agenda items. i apologize. [inaudible] sorry about that. we have a va noptd our town, and, you know, homeless problem that exists through that is, you know, it does affect -- not only our town but our county. i know you spoke on having tsh housing first program. can you expound on that a little bit more. i know, through our funding we are able and we have got the grant. one of the grants is to actually establish 20 new homes within our town and do some new rehab. through that we want to try to

bring that program or bring some programs in to our town to help e the homeless and the va. yes, sir. >> i would point out barbara poppy here from u.s. we're going to put you in a treatment program. we're going try to get you medication you need. if you do well, when you sort of graduate from that, the next

step is housing. we had it backwards. it's difficult for folks to kick the habits. be able to overcome whatever challenges they have if they're not housed first. it's more expensive to let somebody live on the street than house them. when you think about the amount of time. there's a great article in the new yorker a few years ago called "million dollar -- about a vet who, you know, got the know the police well. he would get sober, get a job, and thing fall apart again. when he passed away on the streets, these two police officers went back and figured out that the state of nevada had spent $1 billion on this guy.

let's move folks from the -- and structure around the housing the supports they need. they are more likely to be successful in dealing with the challenges they have say that are struggling still drinking or have substance abuse issues. you put them in a house. having done enough of the of the community meetings. what is amazing about this approach is that it works. it has become the standard approach now. it's saving money, it's changing

lives. it's something that we can work with you on i was just in seattle, they doing it all over the place. the community action has been great. they have full-time security. they are dealing with the challenge of taking folks off the street. and housing them in a way that is successful. it's something that the va has taken up. we have been using hod vouchers. we give 10,000 every year. it's been powerful in helping us. for many folks they need help getting in to housing. with a security deposit or a utility bill. they have been powerful. we have -- hud has very flexible resources

mr. secretary, reappreciative of the -- taking time to be here with us. you clearly listen closely to us. i heard the answers and the suggestions you made throughout your presentation. you walk the walk as well. we appreciate it. we appreciate the interagency work you're doing. and getting away from the government with transportation and hhs and other agencies. and the va as well. it makes it better for mayors when they go to one place. you talk about creating a livable, sustainable city for all of us. thank you very much for being here. >> my pleasure. great to see you again.

[applause] what i would like to do is move on to our next order of business, if i could. our next speaker is bob. global director city community -- and microfinance. he leads city initiative and

i think i hope on the financial institutions that work on community development increasely heavy. and part that have is, you know, for years housing has been a corner stone of the work that have done in community development. and for cities it's been an anchor. we are not the largest bank in term of footprint in the united. we are largest of affordable housing in the united states. and part that have, i think, in term of the work that many institutions have done, have been for years also support by

the community investment act. which many of the cities have benefited from. an act that sometimes trap funds in geography where it may be and needed. i think it's important thinking in term of we are the evolution of the interagency discussions how to can happen. the institutions go where and do this sort of investing where it's greatest need not just where there's a regulatory incentive to do it. housing has been a corner stone of our work. secretary donnavan worked enormously together with him. building innovation. it's been one of the things about community development has been silo. institutions sended to work on housing in one area. they might have worked on education in another. they go health care in another

approach. it was with community organizations. not necessarily this consultation or align wment mayor officers or the cities themselves. we found ourself e lovelling what we've done in the last few years. from moving only housing for example community care centers and health centers to working in groups such as california on the funds. getting fresh food in many areas across the state. urban areas or charter school financing in the inner-city areas that go multiple cities. it's been about moving beyond has proven us we have greater

scale and begin rep indication. other cities where the need is there but strong community organizations exist. they too are in partnership with the mayors. i think mayor's offices have become for us idea centers as women. where should we put our resources business resources and profit resources when it comes to community development. some of the areas about aligning public art work with public policy report -- priority. it comes in a national level but it's more important u for us to drill down to the local level. it's important within all of your offices there are teams question work with.

i would say one of the area what does it mean. i think the secretary also spoke to the idea of the place focus. of really listing specific area of greatest need with alignment and chored nation between the community development programs we bring in. when i think of that, one of the areas we've been working a lot around, for example, working with small entrepreneurs and small business. we work with the mayor rahm emmanuel in the chicago team on building it. how do you replicate the work that other important groups. san diego, new york, and many other cities are doing across other institutions in the city. how do we bring scale to that. in many ways it take the leadership of the mayor's office as well as the strain of the organizations for us to be able to do nap i know a number of your cities are doing that too.

groups that are creating new job and businesses by young years. that movement around urban manufacturing, a new concept of manufacturing industry has a great momentum. we are working now begun with that in new york and san francisco to find a network of cities and well aligned with mayor's offices in trying to generate that. that linkage to the mayor's office and the municipality brings the opportunity to be sure we are going it reach a greater scale. it brings you in many cases the opportunity to show private funding that corp. response to public money to put at work there. that's reaching 22 cities the manufacturing at this point. another thing about linking cities procurement contract with eligible small minority businesses.

we learned that it wasn't enough to just get small businesses certified. you have many roles. not smawmer businesses often to become supply of the cities. one of the areas doing that in los angeles getting a number of the small businesses not just certified by in a position to successfully bid collaborate on bidded. to have that access. so very focused programs around that.

it's a great success. the other focus many of you talked about and came up brought it up. the unemployment and particularly for us the longer term and the older communities and -- we mean older people in the 50s who are out of work and working for decades who are particularly having a hard time getting back to the job market. and long-term being used as an expression of anyone working who hasn't worked for 27 weeks or so. it's not a long time for someone that might have worked 30 years. most of whom are qualified for strong candidates. they need something more and different than perhaps youth coming to the job market or others. we are working with a group of employment -- and i began working on it. the mayor of bridge port was advocate. it mattered and work and bring in some of the long-term residents who have been woe see

it recently the numbers dropping. we know this group has remained indefeat has not seen jobs. it's in ten cities we are replicating. there are others in areas such as finding a one shop place. financial information new york financial empowerment cities. as we lock at immigration, again in that case how do we work through the schools to get youth they get the programs and resources they need to do that. we try to build a through the commission of immigrant affair. i want to lead with the idea

that this holistic approach. it's greater by working with mayors and mayor's offices. we hope we with work many with you. have been awarded. we will focus resources to aggravate as the secretary said to make those true successes. i look forward to working with you. leverage private sector partnership with mayors and your offices, with those civil society where he name the greatest scale and impact. thank you. thank you very much. we appreciate it.

what we're going to do. i'm going to introduce cary. and make a brief presentation. we can open up the questions to bob or cary you have. as i introduce her, many of you are in the committee meeting at our annual meeting in las vegas. and you had a chance to talk about social mobility. it doesn't matter what kind of city or demographic you're in. the biggest issue of our time is issue of social mobility. we are giving all people an opportunity to move from poverty

to middle class and beyond and do it. there's a lot of new thinking around the country. there is science behind what is happening. i want to allow as we conduct our meetings allow for the best idea in thinking that should come in to answering these questions. we had a great presentation how the movements are happening. i want to hay low her to speak a little bit on the brookings institution's report on benchmarking they are doing around mobility and things question should look for from a city standpoint. doctor associate director of the center on children and families and brookings institution. in addition to leading her research interest include

literacy and education from all level from preschool to post secondary prior to her work. >> thank you very much. i know, time is short, so i will be brief. as mayor warren mentioned, intergenerational mobility is simply talking about how we can delink the circumstance of child's birth from their later outcome. that is what our project is about. whether those circumstances at birth are about parent's north carolina, their zip codes, as secretary donnavan mentioned, our parent's education. we want to make the link less about destiny. politically we know that american respond more to the idea of opportunities than they do to inequality, for instance for better or worse.

the problem is while everyone support the idea of opportunity like they do jobs or growth, we don't know how to measure opportunity as well as we do job and growth. we have official numbers. what we're trying to do is put together a way to do that. a way to have an official measure. i'm going not even bother with some of the slides. i'm happy to talk to you to get in touch of with your staff and tell you more. what we know your chances of reaching the middle class by middle age, which we measure about 300% of the poverty line, they vary greatly depending on your family background, race, gender, a little bit. thag the end of the story. how do we get there and improve the number of children who are reaching middle class by middle age? well, as everyone here has talked about, mobility happens over the entire life cycle. what we're looking at is benchmark at each stage that help predict whether or not a child is likely to move to the

middle class or beyond as an adult. we talking to experts in each of the field and come up with a series of normative or predictive that incorporate academic standards as well as behavioral and social standards. stlongest predictor how you do in high school. in high school, for instance, our benchmark is whether or not you graduate with debt grades without being convicted of a crime or becoming a teen parent. right now the average nationwide is 48% of reaching that benchmark. obviously that varies greatly from city to city. the good news is that we know if you reach these benchmarks, you are likely to do well. even though there is great

variation who is reaching it by family income. the good news if you manage to reach them. you have just as good z of chance of being class by middle age. the problem is too few are doing that. just two quick things. one is that we know that success builds upon success. we for instance school readiness. if you're ready for school you're more likely to be successful in middle childhood and so on and so forth. you can see in the chart here that if you're ready for school, you have a 76% chance of doing well in middle childhood. where as if you are off track when starting school, that chance, you know, is almost half as much 41%. so why am i here talking to you about this? well, we think you can use the benchmark in your cities in couple of different ways. first of all, we think you can use it to set goals. where are you in term of

measuring opportunity in your city and where you want to be. can you use this to institutionalize a framework of opportunity, a way of thinking about that hold people to account annually in term of reporting on progress against these goals. third, i think that this framework is useful in evaluating policies and programs. not only do you want policies and programs that have good evidence of effectivenesses but you also want policies and programs that are going to impact these in-- indicators that help opportunity in your city. finally, i want to reinforce the notion that we've heard today already which is that multiple interventions at multiple life stages are going to be the way to move the needle. there's not one silver bullet that solves this problem once and for all. we have done some simulations with our model where we find that intervening once as we've heard from various preschool evaluations may be little bit

disappointing. but intervening again and again, programs for building parenting schools, programs for high quality preschool as well as school reform programs over and over again what we see is that a costs about $25,000 per student, you end up with $140 ,000 benefit in lifetime income. so that is just a little bit of a taste what we're working on. i'm happy to talk more with you in the future about this and we can build in to your city. ..

>> then you have the local school system they set up their rules in what she was talking about doing absolutely fall into the pattern. how do you meant the to to get out of a quagmire refiners also now? bag. >> i can tell you from our standpoint my suggestion

would be as we although people are looking to mayors and cities as engines for innovation. that becomes more apparent apparent, certainly a certain state jurisdictions are representing that if with the next committee we can begin to rise reluct to set benchmarks to model to the city's going to stay in federal jurisdictions to say here are the benchmarks' be want to set. how kids to help us get their verses, can the state? we have an opportunity to set the frame. >> you have three separate bodies this city is not in charge of the school system

in that creates all the problems. >> in some jurisdictions the school is separate from the municipal side we are all in different pockets. we have to be creative about how we do that and i don't know of somebody wants to jump into that is worthy of further discussion. >> that is the same scenario but you could use the bully pulpit to push innovation on the education front so we have to think outside the box how we use our position to drive innovation. even if we don't control the use in the city of allentown i don't thank you do either but philadelphia has some

input so guess the destinies are linked in not in sync it will have a detrimental impact on communities but we could drive that innovation by the very presence of the bully pulpit to. >> a lot of sciences showing what goes on before the child enters the door of the school what goes on with the family and household? how is that parents committed gene for the job scenario? what that is where we have not focused in been creative with the resources we are spending. while the education and behalf system may be separate but this city can focus on that aspect. i would like to add that in addition.

>> in the business in your community how they chime in and the lack of pre-k for employers is incredibly disruptive and food don't have that opportunity to return back to work. we see that many people fall out of the job market. there is enormous value in terms of working families. >> not all education happens in schools. we ty educational advancement in the grade point average to those programs to provide for the kids to lunate academic help as they matriculate you can be involved in the education

to influence that. >> the idea that education is only in schools is important the research shows preschool while important is almost too late we b-2s talk about the most important teachers which is parity and that importance early early onsets children up in a way that maybe easier to access them preschool. >> with what you were talking about it alan tian we have community schools to partner with individual schools they are finding support mechanisms to push innovation. you don't control the

system. >> that sounds well and good but that is not what is happening in baton rouge. you have a governor the refuses to mandating every child gets a preschool education that has never funded preschool. you now are left to depend on head start has a preschool component but they have a waiting list that is unbelievable. so there is still bully pulpit here because the school board would tell you to go to hell if you try to intervene with what they gave as their business. with the education peace i go back to the point you made. what is happening in the homes? a young lady 14 years old comes home, her mom works, belong. the boyfriend comes in and

that afternoon and her mom thinks is the dinner. after gender in she does some of her homework she goes to sleep. after the bomb goes to sleep this jackass goes into the river to have sex with the daughter to tell them what we have something wrong in our household then the bomb calls her a liar which throws her into a different system where these kids run away from home and school. the last part is the stats show if a child cannot read by the time they're four years old, of more than likely they will be a subject of the criminal-justice system. i see everything needs to be put on the table is a

comprehensive peace to look back because we can see violence occurring among youth or mothers at conveying their daughters or have the suns go out and rob or their behalf. there is a whole slew of things going on that is not easy cookie cutter in answer. >> i appreciate your comments. because what we have to get creative about is that question what is happening in that hall with the parent aaron child. where a and how for our we said seeing those households up for success? the adults as well as the children that is what this speaks to there are some great programs and ideas out there that happening on a smaller scale. i will make sure we have

access to those with this committee. unfortunately we have been so ambitious we have to wrap up. i will make sure the various presentations are circulated to the committee members with contacts so you have them and you can follow-up independently. we will also be in communication with you with the advocacy program. which will do a a an event in the spee to be sure the congress and senate hear our voice for the next budget to use the bully pulpit of the 40 year anniversary so we will ask its out there. vat for your participation

this afternoon. we look forward to working with you. [applause] the bill came right after graduating from yale in 1973 be hillary came one year later. her career began right outside this building where she taught causes such as criminal law, a trial procedure.

hillary was educated at the ivy league law school grad that worked but in washington d.c. during the nixon campaign. he was there two weeks before she taught her first-class. square." us now, thank you for joining us. what should be the topic going forward? guest: winning the senate and winning the presidency. ideas,they did they some

but the ideas can be developed in congress by some governors. >> what do you do about the party itself and the ideas he talked about? >> one important thing is the candidates. .eople can talk about democracy people are voting for x and y. republicans have a lot of attractive candidates this year. some of them are unopposed in primaries. it will be the recumbent democrat. others are roman -- running with two or three candidates. young people, women, that, a bushe different from the and mccain and romney. i voted for the mall, but i think we will see one of the big is that began to happen and will really now happen in 2014 is a generational change in the

republican party. >> expand on that. nebraska will stay a republican seat. -- senator, cap members cabinet members, very intelligent and conservative. osborne, who served in the military, state treasury, i think he is 39. whichever one wins, we will have a 40-year-old verylican senator interested in ideas and an expert on health care and how to replace obamacare. some of these other states, they are attractive young candidates. running in a swing district in and decided not to run. likely to the republican. i think she is 29. she will be 30 by election day,

so she will be illegal. 30 is the senate. the house is younger, 25. in any case, she could be there. i really think they are interesting republican candidates running. races,ome of these philosophies come out. look at the senate rate -- race. james interested in the position and already getting some heat. what does it say about the internal politics amongst conservatives and republicans? >> a lot of fighting and it will occasionally result in -- sometimes the candidate does not do well when he is really on the general election stage. i would preferred to have competitive primaries with two or three.

and energy inh the party. in the old days -- this is still them, theyt a lot of hate the idea of the primary. let's clear the field. a lot of primary fights produce very good candidates and good senators and governors. marco rubio upset in the primary in of florida. energy of people coming into the races and thinking they have a chance. a certain amount of wailing and crying and whining, i have the opposite point of view. you lose once or twice, you have like, >>you do not crystal joining us to talk about

politics. you can ask him questions. democrats -- during the course of the morning, we will hear from students asking some questions. they are from texas christian university asking about issues. we will meet them as the morning goes on. those callsll take in just a moment, the e-mails in twitter as well. a quick headline as we go to calls. in the washington times this morning, it deals on larger issues with governor christie and governor mcdonnell. headline says in a few short years, mighty republicans have fallen, specifically about chris christie.

according to mr. mcdonald in virginia, in terms of the presidential bid, he said mr. christie may have some life in him. on what you have seen play out especially on large scale politics. ofpolitics is a zigzag kind business. it is a big mistake to project the future from last year. andle's reputations statuses rise and fall quickly. heginia, i voted for him and was a good governor. a terrible story. it is not just a story. a federal indictment. a good reminder all these people confidently saying here early 2014 what the political sit should -- situation will be, i have my hunch, but it is a mistake. things can change so quickly.

knows. we will have to see what happens. the main thing with scandals is that facts matter. if you are indicted, that is one thing. is nothingt there really done that was illegal and it is not clear he really knew about it, that is something that may be a serious problem but maybe not so serious. 20 years ago, the chief of staff, i remember meetings where a senior bush administration -- one day he was not didn't -- i, he guy,ber cuomo is a serious

governor of new york and an eloquent speaker, and now we have the governor of arkansas with personal issues and possible scandals and so forth i remember being everyone -- everyone being relieved with clinton. he eat us handily and got himself elected and survived impeachment. sometimes these are damaging. the main thing about chris christie, from a national point of view is, the new york republican donor class, the givers to the party and the candidates, they thought chris christie was the front runner. i remember saying to people, he is a front rubber -- runner. is he necessarily going to be scott walker or mike huckabee or rick perry ordered jeb bush or ted cruz?

i could go on and on. caucus or new hampshire primary. i do not think that is obvious. he has been a good governor for four years. a lot of people will run and make their case. the media was wants to find a front runner and anoint him. republicans isor they have a lot of interesting candidates. some of them will outperform. turned out to be an awfully eloquent, impressive guy. there is an awful lot that will happen. it is good to have this kind of debate, a real chance for these guys to get out and prove themselves. and to have guys scrutinize them. that, students

from the texas christian university join us. to ask questions. use either group to ensure there. guest.st student is our good morning, go right ahead. >> good morning. was a time of self reflection for both parties, for the democrats. obamacare, whereas republicans took much of the blame during the government shutdown. there is obamacare inspired by employees that will help candidates. will that be enough to ensure the public is safe in the republican party? >> a good question. two ory visit their three years ago, good panel discussion. i listened to students mostly in

the class. have a horn frog on my desk, a mascot. people say, what is that thing? anyway, a party needs to restore his own reputation and that is ultimately done by having a real government agenda. in a mostly done presidential campaign. for all the unhappiness in the senate and the house, there are a lot of republican governors governing successfully. brand, not is because people think. obamacare is not going anywhere in my opinion. storiedit is a i think thatea

will help republicans quite a bit. say,ther thing i will there are a couple of chances for republicans to mess things up over the next several months. one would be with the debt ceiling, coming up in march. it provides an opportunity for republicans to shoot themselves in the foot. they are working hard not to do that. immigration is another thing that would split the republican party. my proposal for the house republican leadership, tea party types, the tea party types let the debt ceiling go through. would love to delay medicine obamacare and get rid of the bailouts, but it is probably not worth having fights on the debt ceiling and endangering the national debt. people should give up on the , the establishment types, you give up on trying to

ram an immigration bill through this year or next year, republicans will probably have the senate. no default. i think of those two traps can be avoided, the republicans will have a good year. >> here is mike with california independent line. >> good morning, gentlemen. theuestion has to do with global war on terror. it strikes me it is ill- conceived, that we have had more than a decade of fighting. hundreds of thousands of deaths. trillions of dollars have been spent. despite having the greatest military in the history of the a gang ofare fighting psychopaths. the war is not abating. it is expanding. it strikes me the reason for that is that it is poorly conceived. and havingconferring

a war on criminals, which is what al qaeda is, we have inadvertently conferred on them a title of warrior. i do not agree. there have been mistakes made, but they are not just criminals. they have an ideology. it is one reason they are able to up he'll to people. fighto means we need to for the fight against them. we cannot let them take over chance of countries. we are in pretty good shape in the war against al qaeda and islamic radicalism and extremism. some,istan they let slide but president obama ordered a search there, which also worked. the biggest set of mistakes president obama made was announcing afghanistan at the same time he announced the

surge. mightw it looks like he not even do so in afghanistan. is a sort of, we are pulling back. that message is dangerous. it does hardens those who want to stand with us and emboldens those who hate us and those who are on the fence and want to be opportunistic are more inclined to go the other way. i am worried about a resurgence of al qaeda. it is patently false -- president obama's claim that they are on the run. i wish they were. he said in an interview this week the junior varsity -- the jv where is the uniforms, they are still the jv. the fact that al qaeda is recruiting new generations of terrorists is not something to be complacent about.

if they are just jv, they seem to have half of russia on lockdown. a very credible threat against the u.s. embassy. is a little too much cockiness there on the part of the obama administration that they are on the run. i am worried the whole country is to complacent. talk.e cavalier we probably do not need to be listening to all of the stuff. just collecting the metadata. all these phone calls and messages, i am not so sure about that. one reason we have had -- we have had -- we've been safe is that we have had a pretty good handle on where these guys are in their networks and who they're talking to. we are starting to lose the ability to connect the dots. back to before 9/11, i think. >> samantha is on the line. go ahead with your comment. tomy question is a follow-up

one of the other questions. you mentioned two things republicans avoid going in to the next election. you think they will be strong. my question was, what do you strength?he biggest >> 2014 is off year as an election. i believe as strongly as anyone the importance of having important conservative ideas. they will on their a more -- unveil a more comprehensive version of their own health care reform that will be better than obamacare. people are working on that and doing good work. ,istory suggests the election it is about that party's tenure on the white house. do you want to have -- to help them