possibility and come up short. the army prosecutors in the men in case have the highest mark for their attempt to prosecute manning under the 1970 espionage act. and frankly they couldn't get it done in terms of aiding any foreign power, i think the answer has to be that they are honestly not getting it done. ..

quite seriously, somebody who claimed to be a journalist and just what are the entrance levels to be declared of the journalists in this environment? in any event, i do want to take a look for one second at something i'm sure you all looked at over the weekend and that is section 798 of the title of the u.s. code title xviii. michelle van cleave has done a very good piece on this in the recent edition of the intelligence. whoever knowingly and communicates transmits or otherwise makes available to nonauthorized person person or publishes or use in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the united states

any classified information related to codes ciphers or other comet material shall be fined or imprisoned for 10 years or both. anybody here of any impending prosecutions? we have had people do this before and we have declined to prosecute. if there is a flaw in the line line -- law fine but let's think about whether we need this law at all. and of course you know they came up in testimony this week not so much by name but the provisions of 798. several years ago i had lunch with walter has some of you may remember is a legendary figure at the cia and he mentioned some of his colleagues talked about having an official secrets act and they discarded it. they didn't think they would ever get it through the congress. it it didn't fit their values and i continue believe it would be difficult to craft such legislation. even though i thought what if you put in things like

disclosure to disclose illegality or malfeasance or corruption would be a positive defense. could you then have such an act and i can get myself there. and they think that leaves a huge gap for us. how do we protect this information that we have collected, that has been overseen the congress, by presidents ,-com,-com ma by a court from people just publishing it? i don't know how many of the stories that have appeared in the post or the times for other newspapers and on networks relating to an essay from the snowden files really has to do with violations of the civil liberties of americans. count them up. as a 2%, 5%? when i see a story that says nsa's information is being used to support troops in afghanistan that doesn't strike me as a civil liberties violation. that strikes me as what intelligence agencies do when you have to void forces.

and i think back to my younger days when i heard over and over during the watergate period that phrase that members of the committee said over and over, no man is above the law. i wonder if that is still true for us. in any event i think one of the things we should think about before we go down the dark road of an intelligence secrets act is how we as a society look at a lawful government conducting some of its functions in secret and how those should be dead. edmund burke once said that when you want to protect virtue it is better to do it through society than the state because we all know the state can be a very clumsy and inefficient mechanism i would hope at some point they would come to an understanding as a society that the government has a responsibility to keep some information secret and to

do so under oversight, to do so under law and that we should not tolerate the somewhat casual disclosure of that information. let me finish with one thought. from time to time i hear it said even by very senior for intelligent -- intelligence officers at the relationship between the american public and the intelligence services is broken. i don't believe that. i believe that seriously strained. i believe the intelligence services need to do a much better job of explaining what it is they do but i think this is an argument that can be won. i don't see the need for wholesale changes in the intelligence establishment although there are any number of adjustments to section 215 of the patriot act that the congress could make and that i would lose no sleep over it. as a matter of fact if i were

back on active duty and i think most of my colleagues in the intelligence community would share this feeling, these are the rules and the ways we have been functioning and congress changes those rules we will adapt to the changed rules. congress makes the rules. it's as simple as that. but i don't see the need for wholesale change. so where does that leave those? well in counterintelligence after snowden is leaves us in a country governed by an imperfect system that is public and representatives can change. one of the values of the catholic education is a strong sense of original sin which virtually demands that the world is inherently imperfect and that sometimes the bad guys when. but in this case we live in an imperfect country and edward snowden lives in putin's russia. who would change places with him? in the meantime we can continue to count on the dedication and professionalism of the men and

women of our counterintelligence and security services and we can hope for a day when counterintelligence is accepted here as it is in britain as a full peer of the other intelligence services. when i see a volume of mi-5 such as chris andrew's defend the realm and i think of the prestige and my five employees in a democratic system i hope we can someday achieve that. but there are obstacles. for many years i asked my nsa colleagues, but if i encouraged my best intern to pursue a career in counterintelligence? very often i would get the answer, why would you want to do that to a career? that is something we very much have to overcome. my daughter is not here this evening but i want to say in her absence i would put an intern in the field. she works counterintelligence in the field and i'm extremely proud of what she does and all of us should be proud of the men

and women to that work in that field. with any luck that tied i have referred to several times is going to turn an american counterintelligence will once again sit at the american intelligence effort. that truly would be an achievement that would honor brian kelly and until then i hope the men and women of the services understand how much we value what they do. thank you. [applause] questions? >> the guy drifted out of camera range and came back in. [laughter] are there any questions? yes, sir. >> i wouldn't bring this up if you hadn't mentioned it but the warren commission in this many years later there is a skeptical

public with washington especially in issues such as -- [inaudible] he interacted with oswald in new orleans and to say there are 1100 files the cia retained in full and yet republicans told oswald and ruby acted alone. there is a disconnect there. it's impossible and why are there 1100 files files still withheld? >> let me just say i could go beyond the director but i do think if there are 1100 files from the period still sitting classified and we all know we classify too much and keep it too long. this goes back to my concern. when you have a public dispute of the sword and you are sitting on her second help resolve that dispute i think you do great harm to the public record.

that would certainly be my concern. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> you may know more about the cia history but i can't give you too much advice. nsa declassified a ton of records from a relativelrelativel y recent period and i know it involves some degree of risk on their part because the file is so big that the idea of putting eyeballs on every piece of paper was one they finally discarded and so i give them some credit for going by category trying to declassified this stuff that allows them to catch up with things of this sort. it is not a perfect process in every agency based its its own master.

[inaudible] i have a question with counterintelligence. there is a problem with people who are marginalized and well you know better than i do. >> not necessarily. the fact is i never worked at ames case. >> but i'm wondering about the culture that allowed snowden to disclose all the information if there was any sense about how it was and how it happened. >> i have my own ideas. one of the things that strikes me about this and i don't know that it's true but it's certainly been reported that he actually approached people. you are told don't give away your passwords. he approached people as the assistant administrator and said i'm working on a problem, give me your passwords.

on a busy day when a guy walks in and looks like your village machine i'm your assistant administrator and by the way we do discourage you from giving away passwords but i'm different. there's a 50/50 chance i would give it to him. you know he doesn't look like a charming con man. he is a charming con man. i think that's one of my favorite tv shows law and order where there is a detective for a period of a couple of years. they used to do the same shtick over and over. he would go someplace he wasn't supposed to have access for and a landlord would look at him and say are you guys authorized to do this and he would give this guy at the altar boy look and say oh yes we are authorized to break into somebody's apartment. i have a suspicion that snowden was very good at getting people's confidence.

and other questions? in the back. >> it want to thank you for extending the courtesy of your time. >> you missed the opening ceremony and i've got to tell you that ain't much of a choice although it is 30 days of oscar and tcm. >> to the most salient points. one was the advancement of telecommunications information technology has on the transaction subsequently the ability of the united states telecommunications operations and security and more importantly which i would like to -- the process. the examples you brought up reminded me of the new left in the middle 60's. those people when i was at

syracuse university angela davis todd and was the perception that leads to this question surrounding the advanced telecommunications information technology and the culture shift its head on its ability to do operational security and subsequently the role that academia has played in the culture shift as it pertains to the contextual nature of how decreasing information is looked at what role do you think academia could play in shift ding bats potential framework so it's more fair-minded towards its intelligence community and what can we do to ensure an area that is supported by the united states pursuing his interest is -- in that area? >> wow.

[laughter] there are times when you would be testifying in the senate and i would tell all who would have to cover for me, if it was a committee that vice president biden was on. he's just a very nice person that i have to deal with but i think it was time for senator biden and i would say while he is talking look for the question someplace. [laughter] there is a bit of that here. i think as far as the culture of the academic world the only thing you can hope is that tide comes in and the tide goes out. generations change. you know, i think i'm lucky to be teaching at the university of maryland compared to a lot of other places. i gave an interview as a student newspaper the diamondback and they never published it. they thought it was boring which

is fine. a lot of our faculty had clearances. a lot of our students have parents who are in the military who work for one of the intelligence agencies. this isn't like you know the university of wisconsin are someplace. i do hope you have reached the limit to the diversity with no diversity school of diversity at least intellectually on american campuses because it has gotten really quite oppressive in a lot of ways. all i can say is that on the part of me says i listen to a lot of from my professors and graduate schools to some degree as an ethical challenge but we all have to do it. to some degree i regurgitate the back of the paper and i then i left the person on. i think it is to some degree dramatically one-sided. how do you change that. to one degree you have

individual students in the state and around the country who basically say i'm not going to go to the freshman orientation and of course that is a reeducation class. there is something almost quite stalling about some of these things. i don't feel by the way my school, school of public policy at maryland they all know what i did for a living and i've never had anything but the most cordial relationships with my colleagues. i think it's because we are school that deals with the process not an accident -- academic discipline and i think that makes a big difference. i did get invitations every once get invitations everyone's allowed to speak at a class on campus and i can kind of tell when i walk and that the scene has been set for this really evil guy to show up. i feel a little awkward when i leave because being a professor that walks out in the students crowd around the desk and i'm sure he thinks they are telling me i'm really an evil person. they all want to know how to get

jobs in the cia so i think hey i remember how do remember your professor nod and write the stuff on paper and left a finger if you want. i know that has done great damage for institutions but you just hope that the time changes. i know that sounds pessimistic but it's not. it's a long view of history. >> i am a psychiatrist. >> see, i agree with it. [laughter] [laughter] how do you feel about that? >> i have a partial comment on the question that's on the floor and then a question based on your comments. you mentioned the u.k. is being more accepting and lacking and

my five. part of the reason for that is the long hard war that they have had with the i.r.a. which presented not somewhere across the backyard but disastrous bombing attacks and so forth. we are an add nation. it was awakening us however because add so sorry to say that can shift probably again and it wouldn't take as much as a full-blown 9/11 to have a reaction that's quite remarkable

in this country. see this is what am i great concerns. what is an essay doing out there? it wouldn't take much to have a complete reversal there is that point and democracies as we sometimes they have two speeds. do nothing and overreact and i think in me we had the marathon roaming and it's funny that was two weeks before the snowden articles so for two weeks we had members of congress. it must be tough to spin as fast as those guys do. my least favorite phrase from 9/11 once the guys again you guys didn't connect the dots and it's very clear that if we wanted to connect the dots then we should put an essay on steroids to deal with the

communications that everybody who has ever visited russia. or china or any other place. this is tough and part of it is longer history and i say this with some sympathy. we are new at this. the intelligeintellige nce services are new at this. the country is new at this. we don't even call it domestic intelligence. we call it home and security. you couldn't live in the city if you said let's make a department of domestic security. oh my god, take away all of our liberties. europeans understand this a little bit differently. they have been through it, right but i say i always loved this. in one of his memoirs after the second world war and this is the guy who commanded the allied invasion force into europe, had lived on alto for a couple of years and he said americans naturally import the spy.

i don't think he saying that's a good thing but i think he's right. one of the questions i was asked my students as was the most important american intelligence effort to train the end of the revolution and the start of the civil war? don't say anything. it's lewis and clark. did i remember in the sixth grade or the ninth-grade hearing lewis and clark was intelligence? it's a journey of exploration for military purposes thank you very much military purposes thank you very much and economic purposes. it's an intelligence exercise. we don't like that. the pinkertons and of course the name, if they had a nicer name pinkerton wouldn't quite be such a bad idea but we do have that and you know what? i don't want us to get over that. i don't want us to get over that. this thing exists in the attention and it's always going to be some more off or you would really like it to be. i want to turkey a couple of years ago and after i sat down

with one of the turkish members of the panel they said professor and nolte clearly read lots of lott. we in turkey read hobbes. i said no, no you've got that wrong. we read locke and hobbes because madison read both and we do really try to balance these things. did we overdo it in post-9/11? yes i regret the fact that in 2011 we didn't do a tenure to not of the patriot act and the irtpa and the homeland security because they desperately needed them. we just don't work that way and we muddle along. i think we'll take two more. >> the lane with four nature education. first of all thank you very much for your presentation. it started off with a couple of points that i would like to thread back to. you were talking about america's cultural dynamics and early on

you know this by pre-world war ii, post-world war i, pre-world war ii, post-world war ii and how it was being presented in the somatic genre which was the multimedia, which was the media for the u.s. at the time. now fast-forward to now, to we are in everything, just the whole internet tweeting and everything. so going to a point that lieutenant general flynn made a couple of months ago here at the same podium about the rapidfire communications. >> he is a great guy. >> the rapidfire communications, the rapidfire information that

goes on 24 sevenths cycle. and how can the intelligence community through information to the public ever try to keep up with the pr? the very things that we are talking about, the american public is virtually clueless and the information is being left in the hands of media that can use it whichever way they want to at any moment they want to, flipping at one way or flipping it the other. it doesn't really matter and it doesn't seem to be anybody that is taking control for there on agency or agencies. >> listen, one of the things i

i -- i'm retired and they are very patient. when the air force decides it's going to build a new fighter the air force is looking for fifth-generation fighter that has the stealth characteristics. i came from a place that for most of its history stands for anything of such an age in c. and you have to be different without trade you are going to have to be different. i'm not sure and i actually think if you look looked at speeches general alexander made i'm fairly certain you could have pieced together to maintain we have been hearing that nsa is up huge amounts of metadata in doing so in the belief that there is a court ruling and a supreme court precedent that says metadata is not covered by fourth amendment stuff.

i think a lot of this stuff if you find it before the snowden period small stories page a8 but i have a feeling one of the things the intelligence community may have to do is to do a better job of saying this is what we have to do for you and you will have to disclose sources and methods. i'm sorry. you're going to have to do some trade-offs of the benefit. mike hayden said in an article in foreign affairs the american intelligence can only operate within the space permitted by the american public. it's absolutely right. has this space collapse because of the country but -- no but there is pressure and i think it's incumbent on active intelligence leaders and i think to some degree those of us that are tired of doing other things to make the case that look, again i will go back to the "washington post." a couple of years ago they did that series top-secret america a fourth branch of government that

operates without supervision. and it's like, really? really? know and i think they should've been much more aggressive in saying and frankly i get the congress the fall. my concern there was if newspapers are saying there's a fourth branch of government operating without supervision that is not an attack on the nsa. that's an attack on a house intelligence committee the armed services committee. where were you guys? >> in response -- >> nobody gets elected or defeated from the congress defending the nsa. maybe in 2014 that will change but it's not a big issue. is it even attractive to serve on one of the committee's? it's not something you can pose for a photo op. congressman so-and-so opens a new middle school or post office. it's just not -- and that's reason i am so

absolutely pleased with what chairman rogers and congressman ruppersberger and senator feinstein and senator chambliss said done. they have been really upfront leaders in my view. mike rogers conservative republican from michigan and dianne feinstein former mayor of san francisco and she is a out defending nsa? that's pretty good stuff. i think there needs to be, we have to restart the balance between what we do in secret. i know they will see this and say there goes your stays but it's true. nsa has a museum open to the public. you now and then we get an author in there who has been kind of critical. you brought that gyan?

yeah, we are open for discussion. i've said this two years -- for years to my intelligence colleagues. how do you think the treasury department feels? there is no immunity from having a blue badge does not give you immunity from criticism. live with it, deal with that angle on with your life. i know cia college colleagues who have approached me with a huge grin on their face. hey it's so great to see you guys getting slammed rather than us. i say thank you for that but look we try to do secret stuff to a great degree in the public eye and i don't think people acknowledge that. until 10 or 15 years ago you could not even at knowledge in parliament let alone the british newspaper who the head of mi-6 was. i remember being on george tenant staff and somebody comes in and says hey there is a blog that has a photo of your house on it. my house was there in george's house was there and john mclaughlin's house was there.

he was like that's interesting in the big question was how do i break this to my wife? i think this is our tough balance here. people ask how do you teach intelligence in a public university? easy, i don't talk secret stuff. of course you all watched jeopardy last night and he won again. he is a textbook out on intelligence and we do it -- this was pre-reviewed by nsa. i think there has to be more systematic and less episodic. you've got to be out there with a stronger public message. you guys were acting without supervision. you are creating a new body of love. there's his thing called the foreign intelligence surveillance court. nothing in this they did barring some mistakes but nothing generally they did was done

without the foreign intelligence surveillance court approving it. and it is not as a major newspaper keeps referring to it as a secretive corey. it's not a secretive court. secretive is about behavior. it's secret by legislation that created it. it's a tough issue but i think you have to be out there little bit more and engage in the fact that people want to be reassured. even to the point that i can say and i believe this the maryland state lease, google, nsa, all three of those. which one operates under the tightest supervision and? not even close, not even close. nsa operates under tighter supervision than state and local government which are still doing the metadata thing all the time with nobody seemingly challenging it in google,

google? really? i do have to say to my students from time to time when you apply for a job in clearance you want to be careful about what goes on your social network pages. some of my students, not these bright talented people here ,-com,-com ma but some of my students say you mean if i apply for a job at cia they can get into my face but page? really? if you apply for a job at sears they will look at your facebook pages. they say they can do that. i say no, you know those boxes of small text and at the bottom there's a box that says check this and you accepted, bingo bingo. you gave it away. this is not one we solved. this is one we manage and that is what americans do. okay yes, here. >> i'm a student at the american university and i do work for the treasury.

[laughter] >> so you hear it all the time. >> i want to take your conversation a little bit into the international arena. a lot of fire challenges security wise are not just national security here. they are transnational security and a lot of the feelings the american population has of nsa and security community or intelligence community are mirrored internationally so does that mean we have to sell ourselves out to the american population first obviously but also around the globe so we can address transnational security? >> there's a degree to which we have to do this. and i will "my general hayden. he didn't realize the fourth amendment was an international treaty, nor do i but i do think what you need to get to as a point where you have bilateral agreements. i really think that is the only way you can do this but germany and the united states agree on information we are going to share so that their governments can say to their populations we

have this under control. we do certain things with foreign intelligence services to protect against terrorism but we do it under limits. i think there has to be that understanding. i don't think we can just ignore the fact that this has come as a shock to even our allied populations. i think it's kind of funny the reaction of more than one country where there has been a leader standing up and saying i am shocked. i am shocked they ers is spying going on here in three claytor claytor -- three weeks later there is evidence of their government is doing the same thing. i think this goes back to less overtime get comfortable with what privacy we can expect, where we can expect intrusions how those intrusions can be overseen and i think that's a very long conversation. one more and that i'm going to get out of here. >> i may regret saying this but i'm a legislative staffer for the senate so i'm interested in

what you mind elaborating on what changes that would be sufficiently necessary to the public but not necessarily hinder the ability? >> i really don't have any because i haven't looked at the act specifically enough. what i would say is this goes back to the heart of the methodology. let's take a look at what those instruments are. let's see and i particularly look at the post-9/11 legislation. we wrote this legislation. i don't mean we both to some degree it was done very very quickly. when we passed and the country pass the terrorist prevention act somebody, one of you was supposed to go through and find every section in the previous law for the national security at the gave authority to the director of central intelligence you were supposed to find or

your colleagues were supposed to find every and since it much that occurred and put in language that said the powers given to the director of central intelligence under the 1947 national security act and hereby transferred to the director. i can tell you at least for those powers that did not get transferred. the congress does 1500 page bills and the famous you know quote from former speaker pelosi i won't know about it after we pass it or whatever that comment is. i have some sympathy for her for that but i do know i would say go take a look at it. didn't we connect the dots too much? there was a lot of fear after 9/11. at some of that slip into the patriot act in a way that we would like to back off from that? i didn't mention this because i have gone on too long but i'm a big supporter of the civil liberties protection board. i wish them well. i wish they hadn't made that comment in their report to the

president that what nsa is doing is illegal. i don't think that is what they are asked to do. if they had said the patriot act may have gone too far in certain particulars i would have thought that opens up an important discussion so i suspect if you go back to the homeland security act and the fisa extension the patriot act i think they need to post-crisis scrub because they were really done in a crisis atmosphere and that is not the best guarantor of solid legislation. with that again mrs. kelly thank you so much for being here and thanks again to the institute. i really do want to single out my students here. they are hoping to get good grades but we are so proud to have this program with the air force academy. some of our graduates come to us to get a masters degree after finishing up and it's always nice to have people who are embarking on a career in public service and i thank you both for being here tonight. [applause]

politico hosted a forum on energy policy in congress. members discuss their expectations for legislation this year. this is an hour and 15 minutes. [applause]

>> that was pretty lukewarm applause, i've got to tell you. [applause] >> give it up for the house energy and commerce committee. [laughter] >> that's a little better. >> we have got almost a quorum of members here. good morning. we have congressman the chairman of the energy incorporated commerce diana degette from the great state of colorado. i won't bring up the broncos. congressman gene green from texas and -- from illinois. big news last week henry waxman announces his retirement after 20 terms. congressman barton you sat across from him. what are you going to miss most about henry? >> you are sam i am going to miss henry. >> there has got to be one thing. >> actually to be semiserious energy and commerce the

democrats put their 18 members on. you have john dingell the dean of the house and until recently we had ed markey henry waxman frank pallone anna eshoo. it really is, when we debated issue in the commerce committee and the commerce committee is not like any other committee. the debates at tag issues and the arms for mrs. committee that energy and commerce we debate it all. so when you're up against waxman. he is bright, he's smart and he works hard. he has good staff and he doesn't play games in terms of saying one thing and meaning another. from that standpoint he will be missed because he is one of the best. he served in the house for a long time but from a partisan standpoint it will be nice to go to committee and not have to debate him because you know i want every day to have my a game

and i can depend on some of the junior members of which we have one of the best senior members on our side mr. shimkus here to carry the load. >> to hear quickly the republican congress there was alive chair in the room. >> i can comment on that. i was asleep at the time. >> we have a big interparty battle coming up. it's not going to happen until 2015 but we are to have an su and frank pallone diving and announcing that they want to run for the top democratic spot whether it the ranking member. who do you support at this point? >> i think gene and i feel the same way if mr. dingell wants to come back and take back the chairmanship which we hope it will be he certainly is entitled to it. anybody who has listened to him questioning a witness lately knows he is still out there and sharpest attack trade as joe said he knows where everybody is buried and can take full

advantage of that. i'm waiting to see what mr. dingell will do and i'm ranking member on the oversight and investigations subcommittee so if mr. dingell decides not to i can sit down to my friends frank and adam both your friends and as joe says wonderful members of congress. i am here to say i'm not going to run for chairman. >> congressman green how about you? >> we have worked together, my wife and his wife are really good friends. i am with him and i told him that. >> he lost the race with henry waxman a couple of years ago but if dingell does step forward for you going to go blind amend complete him -- support them completely? >> it could be a race but job when he lost that race he was a gentleman and he has come back and like i said in diane said

you watch them in the committee. he has not missed a beat so i think he would be a great ranking member. >> he will be a chair. >> dream on. congressman shimkus what you think about the departure of congressman waxman and potentially the elevation of john dingell to the chair slot? what do you think that would do to change the dynamics of the committee? >> henry brings passion to the issues. the thing about henry is he can really fight and you guys observe it. it looks like we really don't like each other but people like henry. when we walk around and visit going to and from votes he is as passionate on his issues as i am on mine. i think there's a healthy respect and what members have to do on the committee, you have to be more than passionate. you have to have the legislative

chops to be able to debate why you feel that way. i have think i have learned a lot of what i did in the majority early when we were in the minority. i kept teasing henry, don't be mad at me. fortunately we were able to come back a lot of that was observing how the democrats operated the first time when they were in the minority. i've been there quite a long time now. >> it will be different in the committee with waxman and markey gone. how do you think the committee's dynamic is going to look? >> we will pick up some new members on our side. if we are in the majority we will pick up a line and but that is the beauty of it. you have to server tomb -- you have to serve a term or two

and we want to make sure that everybody on their takes that leadership. i think we will see a number of new members just because of the vacancies we have. >> i will say we have a real gap of expertise on our side of the aisle and i think we will obviously miss henry a great deal. he is a great advocate and he has been there for a long time and of course with ed markey dissenting to the other body i think they will be missed. >> markey won't return my phonecalls. [laughter] >> that's what happens. we do have a real depth on our side of the aisle. we are very tight and we consider ourselves a family and we will keep working on the issues. >> your offices used to be next

to each other. >> mr. markey and i shared a space and one i heard him yelling i would go over there and calm him down and when he heard me yelling he would come and call me down. usually i was yelling because i found out something he was about to do. >> he let's jump in to some of the issues on energy and commerce committee in what is clearly you put it on their the keystone pipeline. the house republicans did make a decision not to put keystone is the debt limit negotiations. what is the reason for that? is a clearly votes or a sense within the conference? >> i think the clear consensus is the keystone pipeline should be approved. most of it has been built. the state department once again last week i think came out and said they had no reason to oppose it and i don't know the exact phraseology they use. so i would expect that sometime in the near future the president and the secretary of state will approve it.

as to why we have not chosen to attach it to the debt ceiling we been a republican majority, they asked me about it and i want to do stuff on the debt ceiling that reduces the deficit in reforms entitlements and gives us a balanced budget. the keystone pipeline creates jobs but it's really not a debt ceiling type issue. i would vote for it on the debt ceiling but i don't see that is something that should be attached. >> congressman shimkus do you agree it should have stayed off and whatever other means you have tried? >> i think it's standing on its own right now and i think the movement in that direction and the administration based upon where they have been will have a tough call. are they going to go with science or are they going to go with national interest? are they going to go with the far left environmental set your of our country? they are in a tough position.

we think it's moving in the right direction so i think that is why we have another fish to fry in this whole debt limit debate. it's not his prescience. it's one of these things like health care. how many times do we have to show people we support keystone itself? people know that republicans are on board with that principle. >> diana? >> well, i want to thank the republicans for deciding to come to their senses and that like mature adults and not try to attach the keystone pipeline to an unrelated issue of the debt ceiling. i think that's great and i'm happy to hear my colleagues talking about that. john talks about science and this has been one of my pet peeves in the committee that we seem to move forward at that. the keystone xl pipeline what came out last week was that the

environmental impact statement which was a step in the approval process by the state department so i think what should happen is now we should finish going through that review, go through the scientific process and then see where it comes out whether should be approved or not rather than having congress come rushing in in the middle and for whatever political reason we might have trying to rush approval. we saw the same thing with yucca mountain. >> yes, we had been rushing. [laughter] >> no, what happened and i actually went to yucca mountain with joe. they were going through the whole process. i went out there and i said this is pretty much out in the desert that we need to go through the scientific -- what happened was the republicans came in and try to jam that scientific review to approve it and then the democrats came in and they tried to jam at the other way. some of us were sitting there

saying why don't we let the science play out? that is the way i feel about the keystone xl pipeline. let's let the state department to their review and then the president and the state department can decide what to do based on the science. >> on the point we will have a court case that will allow the review of volume three to be reported out and that will project yucca mountain for a million years, that dynamic. unfortunately it wasn't us. the administration stopped funding and it was a court case. it was a court case that said follow the law and the nrc follow the line get the evaluation rule out. >> i am from texas and houston and i have not had a pipeline in my area so i'm a big supporter of keystone.

we have pipelines from canada and mexico and particularly in texas and this approval process has taken way longer. the average time is two years and we are now going on five great i hope the administration will move quickly but joe is right. in our area of texas it's already being built. you don't have to have the state department permit. you can literally go from the canadian border to the industry along the gulf coast so a lot of that is being done. we just have to have stayed department approval to go across to canada. it's been frustrating because the five refineries and up until recently i represent all of them. they handled heavier crude from venezuela and to me it's easy. it's heavier canadian crude than what we got from venezuela so i'm hoping the administration will move quickly now.

>> this goes to secretary kerry and ultimately president obama. a lot of treasure for them to reject this. congressman barton do you think ultimately when this decision is made it will be against putting the pipeline? >> oh no. it's going to be approved sometime this year. >> you think so? >> look at what diane said. the president and the secretary always base decisions on science so based on what she said this thing is in the bag. >> we have 100, 200,000 pipelines all over the country. i can can't build a fencepost in my backyard without having to call the number to make sure i'm not hitting a pipeline. i have a feeling to be serious for a half a second that it has been debated so long that in spite of the environments all religious opposition to it it will be permanent.

it make sense economically and there is no scientific environmental reason not to do it. >> do you think congressman to get made a mistake -- [inaudible] >> i think the environmentalists are concerned about the u.s. continuing dependence on foreign crude oil and that is why they put this view out there. but i also think and i have been thinking a lot about this, if you look at what has been happening with the increased development of natural gas in this country and the decrease in reliance on foreign oil and with their increasing attempt to develop renewable energy i think what we really need and i've told the environmental community and also the oil and gas community what we really need is a long-term energy plan. i think fossil fuels, crude oil and natural gas are a good

transition that what we haven't had is any kind of national energy plan and as a result which is kind of go from issue to issue. keystone xl and we had the hearings on my committee on renewable energy tax credits and so on and so forth without thinking what is our plan both short and long-term. that is one reason why our colleague congressman mckinley from west virginia and i have put out -- normally i don't like commissions but in this case i think would really make sense to have a bipartisan commission that would try to develop a long-term energy plan so that we wouldn't be just fixating on one particular issue or another. >> i had one comment on what diane just said. the canadian tar sands have enough oil that can be processed at current prices for something

a little bit lower down to $60 a barrel to supply every month of u.s. imports expected for the next 35 years. that one deposit. that is not a bad midterm energy plan if we are going to go with what diane just said. >> i would rather have natural gas as a substitute. >> i won't argue with that. if it's from texas. >> or colorado. >> chairman upton said in the last couple of days legislation to speed up the terminal is something he wants to put on the agenda this year or her into early next congress. what about interest on the oil expert -- export ban. let's go down the line here. do you think we will see action this year on the oil export issue? >> i'm the task force chairman of the study task force on

energy and we we are going to put out a series of position papers and maybe a comprehensive bill. that is all one of the things we are debating whether to support the end of the band ban. i can debate either side of that. from a pure economic standpoint it doesn't make sense to have an export ban. let's eliminate that. on the other hand for more of a pragmatic classical a lot of vampire myths will like us to send mail. it's really worth having that fight. we have had it since the mid-70's after the oil embargo. not a bad strategic position to prevent oil exports. economists say that if we end of the band based on situations today but publicly see domestic oil prices that have trouble getting the oil to market today probably go down for $5 a

barrel. >> what he think about the political aspect and the possibility of seeing domestic gas prices go up which i think is a political difficult vote if you are a member of congress. congressman degette do you have any idea if this is a nonstarter at this point? >> i would differ to my colleagues in the majority. i don't know if they are going to bring these bills up or not. i think it's worth having the discussion certainly especially as we continue to develop. >> how would you vote? >> congressman green do you want to weigh in? >> we have a procedure right now with crude oil exports and let's see how that works in the state department and department of energy can deal with that. let's look at all the

opportunities if we have idle macs and crude oil. unlike natural gas where we have so much more that we are going to be exporting and in fact my favorite story and those of you have been to texas know we pride ourselves on -- their slogan is eat all weekend and sell the rest. that is what would want to do for natural gas. we want to use all weekend and sell the rest. i have the chemical industry growing like crazy in south texas. we want those downstream jobs but we also know we have enough to export. >> chairman shimkus what do you think about that idea? ..

this. >> you highlight a point i don't think there is a solid republican position on this right now. >> going to question -- questions on twitter with #

energy 113. for the with the 30th congress. with the energy bill that they have tried to bring it up it keeps getting blocked. anything with energy efficiency this year? >> if i was asked on the specific bill that would not be an active legislative congress the president and the senate disagree with the house on most issues. so any kind of major energy initiative i think we can debate it put things down and develop but from the republican point of view i think we prefer to wait and hopefully see the senate become republican in november then do something 2015. >> host: you have a similar dynamic with the bush and administration

working with the republican president 2007. >> dote credit be i voted against that as often as i could have fought that with every fiber of my body. i will take credit with the 2005 but not the 2007. >> host: but i am going with that it is they ripen fire meant. >> it is it is for the current environment. >> but what about energy efficiency? we should be able to agree on that bipartisan basis. it is the law making first. even disagree with the senate we often disagree but why couldn't we all agree with that spirit we have done three or four. >> there is more work we can do. >> loved to go to home depot to pay $30 for a light bulb

is given and that is not what the energy efficiency bill is. >>. >> just a slap him? [laughter] >> but that light bulb thank. >> that was not my bill. in 2005 there was energy efficiency and that is why we have been extended daylight savings time that was in the bill. that was in the amendment and i allowed it to a and i am proud of that. >> also other issues. i want to more domestic production and our partners of mexico and canada but we need to value the resource. three can use that torrey efficiently whether gasoline or electricity it is part of our portfolio.

>> i am not as far that i also think we could do energy efficiency but it is such a small percentage of the use. my biggest concern is gigawatts, not efficiency because as cold goes offline nuclear power is threatened, the promise of green does not produce a generation, fortunately we have natural gas that could fill the gap but it people are buying the -- sleeve of they don't become too are real crisis on base load generation and that should be the focus for. >> any chance for interim storage proposal for the blue ribbon commission recommendation? limit we did have some discussions with senator alexander and feinstein.

they know where we stand. in terms storage is off the table but the acceptance that 30 years investment into yucca mountain granted the report the safety evaluation report says it is safe that that we go to the debate may be some place else but yucca mountain always has to be a part of the debates. >> talk about the of legislative process then we move to the executive from and obama says with the epa regulations with few passing your climate bill with the public hearing today. you have had multiple votes but it looks like this is going forward.

>> just follow the law. don't make a lot. i just happen to have a letter that myself that we sent to the epa back to november talking about these new coal based emissions standards. they base those standards on demonstration projects with use of carving capture it and the sequestration. the energy policy act if anybody wants to look it up explicitly says they cannot do that. but yesterday they did a proposal that maybe they did. baby but they have done is illegal maybe they will take a step back. right now my position on

some of these things with the war is you may not like it if you cannot change the law, follow the law. >> let me respond i think the epa is following the law and the courts have agreed. furthermore the problem with coal is not of war against coal but market conditions changing. not only less environmentally but not as economical to produce or burn. i feel badly for the coal miners in their families but we need to help them transition to a cleaner were easily achieved a fuel of natural gas. >> you have some coal in your backyard is a central illinois how do you feel

right now about the epa regulations? >> joe is right. it has to be economically feasible the plan that is using $2 million over the projected budget. that is not economically feasible that a private sector would not need support from the federal government can operate this. they are breaking the of law >> they are starting to ears. >> there is a of a cart -- a court decision under the clean air act it to but regulation on greenhouse gases if we want to change that law which i think we should do it is a congressional decision, i would hope epa would be reasonable but they have been ordered to do that. the only way to stop that is

to do something that passes both the house and the senate to set up cap-n-trade but we need to do things that will control carbon with congressional authority >> just remember it was said its rights seeing the of what it was specifically debated carbon dioxide should never be part as emissions standards of legislatively there was never support. >> they called it a horrible mess. it is time to wrap up our conversation take you for joining our perspective i will ask you to walk out the opposite way that you came. [applause]

>> however like to welcome our next group of experts to the stage. well done. we came this way. [laughter] so money is to tell the chairman he has a live microphone on. from natural resources defense council in the national association of manufacturers, a brookings institution and from cf i s you heard this panel ruled congress out legislatively for action and readjust getting started here 2014. what are you most disappointed about? what is the one thing if congress could prove bullish

you most like to see them tackle? >> it is a great question is so normal in terms of legislative action. what i would really like to see is not in the things that will lead pass but unfortunately what you see so many times we are wrapped around the axle with particular issues at a time when the united states is more dynamic than it has been a long time. we are the international oriented think tank people around the world come here to find out what it means on the climate change agenda and on technology. i feel a lot of time in the intelligence haag liz wasted on conventional issues that definitely need an answer by yet not at a place where we

have of readily available user. if nothing will happen then maybe creative thinking is in order then maybe the executive branch. >> throw your best idea at the wall david. >> i think a one piece of legislation they need to pass but most of the debate right now do we have the infrastructure to we have the permanent structure for pipeline and liquid natural gas and that is the classic between the executive branch will move quickly enough or if congress passes legislation to force them to move quickly. so we are seeing those permits out there.

and it was the obama is executive order to move all infrastructure quickly oil and gas is not in that basket. i can see to things that the administration could do to help move this with lng 90 dash zaph -- 90 days after the permit is through they move. the or they could just before quickly or the a administration could move the authority may be the state department does not want it. >> capitol hill? what would they like to see congress tackle? >> we certainly would put energy efficiency at the top of that list. in the realm talking wish

list is to drive it -- try to draw some lines. whether with field or something like that. added at or near the top of my wish list. >> you have a lot of things you would love. >> to the world of the possible focusing on efficiency most people agree creates jobs would be a good thing for congress to do a and consistent policy on renewal posed that kept the google's going without the back and forth. in two of these clean energy is important in to have legislation on klay that.

with the epa rules it is critical to get going on climate change. that will not be in congress domain at least affirmative action reducing carbon emissions but epa has the pen inveigled to move forward a. >> do you think we will come back to a climate debate that it will work its way back to noone cap-n-trade to control carbon with that legislative approach? >> congress absolutely has to come back and some state that has been taken up with international negotiations. it will not be in the near term but over four or six years have passed to be addressed and we will put it

in the standards and unleash clean energy across the country right now with 186,000 jobs on clean energy by the time congress gets around to it said it will happen with states all across the country and an easier thing to do. >> national association of manufacturers is fighting those climate rules pretty hard. will congress have to weigh in? >> i firmly believe this is our policy. it is not particularly good but the farther down we get think about all i argue it is the good or a coordinated way we have the clean air act in a particularly dangerous way with a project

by a current project basis. poor them or that we do. >> to be in the state department where d.c. that dynamic going? why are we holding on for another disaster? >> i don't have high expectations but the best deal at the time but frankly

we may come up deficit with the keystone xl canada has to find a way to beat their greenhouse gas emissions and target to do keystone and everything else but they will because of copenhagen. i don't think secretary kerry understands this. but they will increase gas penetration in china and india as a replacement for coal. but to reduce its and those greenhouse gas emissions. >> talk about the negotiations. are we in a perpetual state?

>>. >> we have a problem every look at the slam dunk for the home run. that feels more satisfying but in between copenhagen and now the narrative where the climate changed a pate there is actually a great deal of moderation that happens that his overall very helpful. end to skip domestic oil and gas production that is not as satisfying to either end to focus more on adaptation those are the things that you need to have a full

hearted climate policy. with the all or nothing debate is important. they have actually moved in the way that is more pragmatic for those whose don't occupy those in the specter of and to the end of the year people will realize there is another bay grant up to talk about the future egad. >> now to see that come back civic we just heard congressman barton say it was in the bag there was no way this could not be approved it was a decision with the enormous pressure of the president to reject

the pipeline. do you think you will be successful? >> i do. the state department's analysis shows for the first time to give the president the information he needs. this will exacerbate climate emissions to expand the tar sands development is expected them to turn it down? climate issues are going up the dirtiest fuels of the plan that there has to be a strategic decision to go down a clean energy path or go ahead with fossil fuels that is destructive to the climate. we think the information is

there and the analysis is complete and it exacerbates the problem and he should turn it down. >> with the world series champs back then it gets to the point quite frankly to investors around the world is a sign united states is not open for business. here is the exhibit say no beggar poster child is in the national interest shown again and begin for economic reasons enough already.

>> i read that like those of that the energy department study like before. but the pipeline is not the cause of increased production is this side of the pipeline verses' rail safety issues the environmental impact is negligible in did is one or 20 million it is hard for the state department to construct a national interest that it is not in the national interests the energy security one way or the heather you can argue about the numbers we hope

there was a focus they would encourage the canadiens to reap the copenhagen target and then the debate would be over coal with fuel efficiency because with those are stationary then you make progress. >> this is a political question trying to invest so much to influence this decision did they make of the state -- mistake it? >> no. i don't think it is more energy policy but that is not the question. one of the things that was very useful is the focal

point that is surveying the of litmus test that is fine but my question and has always been what do you do post keystone? on the north american continent so what do you do to make as a decision that is part of policy? fortunately i think rather than move the debate for for died feel it holds up the debate with one pipeline and one project because i fundamentally maybe i am in the minority but actually don't take it is coming anytime soon. if you continue this place you don't have a decision with massive amounts of unintended consequences not

get paid to the heart of the debate to communicate a stronger and more robust in the effective sides of the ledger. >> what comes next? >> the most important thing are the card read rules for power plants cpa is on target that is the single largest thing we can do to reduce emissions with a major reduction in did we can praying that down to get the u.s. saw of the trajectory that the president committed to and this is a huge juneberry significance step for were the centerpiece of the president's climate plan. there were 3 million

comments we expect more of an aged people are galvanize to address this issue. with the priorities focused to reduce emissions from the up commerce sector. nobody should say we are not focusing on a very important commitment to ensure he reads that commitment. >> we will give you the last word we have the next panel for coming in just a minute. thank you for the time to talk with us today. [applause]

>> for our final discussion today i am delighted to bring in senator grasso and white house to the stage. >> good morning. glad to be with you. interesting discussions so far this morning in we have some time to beryl's your topics. we have talked keystone quite a bit. >> how amazing. >> senator you have to former colleagues that make the decision barack obama in and john kerry what kind of pressure do you bring to those senate democrats of those individuals with a

final decision and? >> i want to make sure they make a fair and logical decision in that the decision helps our national interest to exercise leadership in the area of carbon pollution. . .