>> i am proud of my humid lity. >> you mentioned lightbulbs, which were a bipartisan initiative and pass on a bipartisan basis, and efficient lightbulbs seems like a little thing. it saves a huge amount of energy. we also did building standards and fuel efficiency and a number of other things. i cannot vote here any more, but i certainly support your initiative to help c i can vote here anymore but i certainly support your initiative to help countries help themselves. it's a point we have all made about tough love in ukraine. they have to take the steps that we could give them the tools that would help them take these steps. i think others may want to comment but i think this is a very good angle. finally using our asymmetric strengths against russia our

asymmetric strength is our economy for their asymmetric strength of some of our good ideas like these and the debate with ukraine could help with these ideas and that would go a lot further than some of the other ideas. >> may i ask each one of the witnesses just very briefly, don't have a lot of time on this question of energy efficiency and natural gas that we help with rivers flowing other issues but the real issue do you all agree this is an area we should zero in on and that will make the bigger long-term difference in any change in our energy market? >> energy efficiency in the ukraine helping ukraine produces on natural gas is a good thing and i think we actually went that direction in 2012. the price for households pay for their heating gas is one sixth the price that ukraine was paying to import that. by raising the prices they are going to introduce a huge

incentive for all of those households. >> thank you. >> absolutely. there are two major components along with others and i would include us exporting lng and encouraging europe to get it from other sources as well. >> even if it does increase elect or city rates in the united states? for reasons that go well beyond. >> senator i don't take a position on energy legislation are sanctions legislatilegislati on but i will say that we believe the conference of approach so it's on almost all of the above in terms of building capacity in ukraine. >> with regard to technical expertise the ukrainian government welcomes energy diversification, a host of all the reform issues. they welcome technical expertise and a major way as they go forward. >> i think that we really do have a huge opportunity here in and the more we learn about this country the more that people see that it can be transformed.

they could increase their energy efficiency by 10% in two years. they could increase their energy efficiency by 50% in five years. we have to use every bit of leverage that we have in order to help them accomplish that goal. that's was going to keep us up at night with nightmares. that is why china looms larger because they are going to see their market shrinking dramatically and the geopolitical leverage as well because that's what it's all about when they talk about serious or libya. unfortunately oil underlies a lot of each one of those and here we get a chance to do something for them that makes them self-sustaining. my hope is that we can talk about this issue on a bipartisan basis in the committee and get right at the heart of the weakness. get right at the heart of the whole story as well which is a necessity today of deploying natural gas but something we can change dramatically and have the ukraine say to russia we don't

need your natural gas anymore than we need your soldiers and that is the state and they should be able to make in the near future if we help them to construct a plan and give them the help they need in order to be successful. thank you mr. chairman. >> senator merkley may be the first member the committee but he's front and center on energy policy and global affairs and we appreciate his expertise on the committee. two final questions. one ambassador you have talked about this several times in your answers and i'm concerned and i like to hear some of it views as well. ukraine yes but all of eastern europe and that is the saturation the russians have created with their broadcasting into the region. of course it is not an open-ended raw testing testing s of use. it's directed by the state. what should we be doing at the

voice of america radio free europe to quickly increase our level of engagement in this region so that in addition to a domestically created series of social networking platforms that there is additional opportunities for multiple voices to be heard? >> senator i would argue that we should use those programs boost them into the regions but we should also take a look at the social media platforms ray there are ways that we can help to create anchors outside of the regions such that it makes it harder for the russians to come in and shut them down. so it's helping to provide the technical expertise to foster the development of the social media platforms that are indigenous in the region but also taking steps to help reinforce and protect them from

hostile moves such as we saw in eastern ukraine. >> anyone else? >> i would say we could also work with the poles and others in eastern europe so it's not just something the united states is doing. i think we have a lot of friends in the region in which we can enhance their capacity for broadcasting and communications in ukraine and also bolster the ukrainian capacity in this regard as well. >> just to reinforce the earlier comments about social media i think there's a huge voice in ukraine that knows how to speak for itself really just needs resources. >> one final question which is really i think an important one but which in the focus of ukraine we haven't talked about it and that is the nuclear nonproliferation implications of what has happened in the ukraine ukraine voluntarily surrendered their nuclear weapons that they

inherited from a former soviet union within exchange by the former russia as well as the u.k. and u.s. to inspect ukraine's territorial integrity. are there implications for global nonproliferation regimes with a loss of crimea or a threat to eastern ukraine that if you have a conclusion that if ukraine had retained these nuclear weapons the loss of crimea would not have happened and therefore possessions of nuclear weapons is the only guarantee of territorial integrity by a nuclear power such as the russians. i'm concerned that some point in some of my travels i have heard a little of that from other countries and i'd like to hear from anyone has any perspectives on it. >> mr. chairman i helped negotiate the 1994 security insurances which was part of the

agreement and what i think one of the tragedies with the russians have done with their assault and the annexation of crimea which is violating the commitments they made in that document to respect ukraine's territory volley of -- territorial integrity as they have now to value the idea of security insurances which could've been a tool in another poet for a geisha in case it might've been the solution in iran or in our three at some point to one of the reasons i think it's incumbent upon the united states that we cosigned the past memorandum is why we should be doing things to support ukraine but to penalize russia to make clear that there are in fact consequences for violating it. the russians have grievous damage to the ability of a security insurances up budapest to be part of the solution in proliferation cases. >> i agree with steve that from the standpoint of the middle

east i has been much of my time and effort in the past and now what's important is what happens in the days, weeks, months and years ahead. if the russian action is punished to an ever greater degree of power by the international community, if crimea is not a good knowledge is basically russian the way we just forgot about south ossetian if we can show that their military and other actions and first of all will preserve the bulk of the ukraine will make it a vibrant part of the western community in the future then i think countries will say yes led by the united states the west stood up and there is an international alternative to us developing not just weapons of mass destruction but large armies and 1914 kind of local

coalitions and other things that taken together are going to undercut this so we have a lot of work ahead of us to ensure not just for the sake of ukraine but they sake of nonproliferation and the overall international order in to quote an earlier american president, this shall not stand. >> this has been a very insightful panel. we appreciate all of you sharing your time and your expertise and your insights. this record will remain open until the close of business on friday and with the gratitude of the committee this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> russia and like the united states as a nation which believes in its mission and our

missions are pretty similar. we believe in distributing our core values which suddenly disappeared in the 90s and the 2000's but it didn't go anywhere because at our core it was still there and the biggest national idea for russia doing all those years was the victory day. that is our main holiday and that's what unites the whole nation is the fight against -- and how it was presented to the nation by president putin is that in ukraine does our western fascists they came to power and he demonstrated with former ukrainian liberation army during

world war ii so he use that as proof that these are fascists who are fighting against russian and ukrainian nation. we are looking just to protect russians or russian minorities. no, for the overwhelming majority of russians we are continuing world war ii and we are liberating the ukraine from the fascist threat. a bipartisan agreement was reached in the set of a bill to try to address some of the

problems at va medical facilities. we will get update on the deal in a moment here on c-span2's. leo shane's congressional report for military times. how does the agreement between bernie sanders and john mccain deal with the delays of the va health care sense them? be there a couple of different aspects to it. the most immediate would be to give veterans who are waiting and have difficulty accessing va health care a card and an option to go to private doctors who take medicare or tricare patience enough to get them out

of the va system completely at least until these wait time issues are resolved. it's a $500 million in this bill to hire more doctors and nurses to address that wait time issue. there's also an accountability aspect. there are a few commissions to look at what the larger problem is and provisions to make it easier for the va secretary to fire administrators who are found falsifying records and covering up problems so all of that together they are hoping will adjust the core problem of veterans not being able to get in to see their doctors. >> host: the talk between bernie sanders and john mccain seemed to have been accelerating in your piece senators announced a deal to address be a problems. what was it that brought the two together and getting it done so quickly? >> guest: we have seen this issue moving quickly through congress with the recent scandals facing the va so senator sanders has been working on this legislation for as far back as january or february.

he had a massive omnibus that failed so a lot of the aspects of this bill are included in there as well. senator mccain has been all over the va talking about ground zero for the scandals like phoenix and he's been involved. in last week they have seen legislation coming out of the house some accountability accountability measures for mayor and a real push from the public to get something done. i think that lit a fire under both sides to come together and reach a compromise which is a bit unusual right now in congress. >> host: have you heard anything from the vet's chair in the house and the sun and more broadly the republicans in the house are they lining up behind the bill? >> guest: is still early for folks to jump on that there are a lot of provisions they have supported in the past and especially the accountability measure. a slightly different than what the houses already passed through the houses are to pass. the houses looked at a few different versions of this but there has been a real push from

outside to get some sort of measure that would let the va secretary fired top executives a little bit easier. that's where the house will be focused on the problem emanating from this idea that their senior executives that just aren't good managers and aren't overseeing their departments right or are actively gaming numbers to get better bonuses. there is a lot of support for that provision. we'll have to see if the provisions and there are some associated with the sanders mccain said it would take a special one-time appropriation to pay for this. we will have to see if the house goes along with whatever the price tag is. >> host: in the houses seemed like a bone of contention with bernie sanders in a tweeted about what might be in the deal between senator sanders and mccain saying become ability portion of the senate deal would have dismissed or give va employees one week to appeal three more weeks for final decisions so what brought ernie sanders over the in his

opposition? >> guest: it was that provision the idea that there was some sort of an appeal process and i think senator sanders has said all along that he believes corps performing managers should be fired but the way the house bill was written it didn't have any of those protections in there. senator sanders inserted as you said one week to file an appeal in three weeks to get an answer on an appeal. he feels that's enough of a check and balance to make sure that these aren't political firings and there is an something nefarious going on. we will see i know several house members even a few who voted for the house version said they would have preferred a little bit more of a check and there are some sort of appeals process so i've imagine that shouldn't be too controversial in the house. >> host: also on twitter at leo shane he said center began on the floor to say -- scented floor today said -- is it too much reading into the proximity here with the 70th

anniversary of d-day? >> guest: this is an issue that has been going on for months down the house and the senate so i don't know. there's obviously a lot of folks focusing on veterans especially elderly world war ii veterans. it seems like each one of these holidays in each one of these anniversaries is another reminder of a bit of urgency. we heard this amount -- around memorial day. not exactly memorial day issue but the sort of topic and reminder of just some of the difficulties facing veterans and the challenges. i think it's something that lawmakers have been sensitive to ethical back to their districts and they are hearing a lot of it. obviously no one wants to be seen as a lawmaker leading veterans down. >> host: wendy's since we will see a boat on the house floor? >> guest: senator sanders and senator mccain were both optimistic. we could see something as soon as next week. the senate has plenty on its

plate already been senator reid has been talking about the accountability measures specifically waiting for senator sanders to come up with a package. it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities see this move quickly through the senate. >> host: leo shane the militaries congressional correspondence for military times. read more at military times.com. thank you for joining us. >> guest: thank you. >> mr. president i believe every member of the senate and every american understands the very deep debt of gratitude that we owe to the men and women who have put their lives on the line to defend this country. that should not be a political issue. it should not be a partisan issue. i think all of us have been appalled by what we read about in phoenix and other locations about people manipulating data

pretending that veterans were getting care in a timely manner when that was not the case. it is my strong belief that the chairman of the senate returns committee that every veteran in this committee is entitled to high-quality medical care and that they should get that care in a timely manner. i'm going to do everything i can to make that happen. we live as everybody knows in a politically divided country and a divided congress. reaching agreements is not easy and quite frankly does not take place very often here in the senate rate unfortunately for whatever reason without casting blame it just doesn't happen and the american people understand that and are not happy about that. reaching a compromise among people who look at the world very differently is not easy but in this process senator john mccain of arizona and i have tried our best to come forward with an agreement. it's an agreement which i'm sure

he is not 100% happy about and i can fully assure you i'm not 100% happy about. i would have written a very different bill and what i want to say now in thanking senator harry reid for his strong support for this process. chuck schumer patty murray and dick durbin pushing this forward. i hope that we will be back on the floor to continue the effort to deal with the many unmet needs of veterans but right now we have a crisis on our hands and it's imperative that we deal with that crisis. to my mind the essence of the crisis is that we have learned that in many parts of this country, not all parts that many parts of this country, veterans cannot get the timely care that they need. they cannot walk into a b.a. and within a reasonablreasonabl e period of time get the treatment that they need. and so this bill today in a significant way begins to

address that important issue. now let me very briefly tell you about how it does that. there are many locations around the country where we need new facilities. we need refurbished facilities. we need expanded facilities. in fact there are 26 locations in 18 states where that is the case. this legislation would allow the construction of 26 medical facility leases and states around the country and i believe that will help us in many parts of the country and providing the quality timely care that our veterans deserve. mr. president in my view there are areas of the country where we simply do not have the doctors, the nurses and the other staff that we need to provide the care of that our veterans deserve.

many primary care physicians get burned out by working 12 to 14 hours a day. the turnover rate is too high. it is my view that the va by and large and this is good by the views of the veteran community themselves in independent studies that when people get into the va the quality of care is good but i will tell you if you don't have a primary care physicians, the other physicians and nurses that you need to treat veterans they are not going to get the care that they need. this legislation will target $500 million in nonobligated balances for the hiring of new va doctors and nurses. i see that as a significant step forward. mr. president, one of the great i've think embarrassments or shocks that all of us feel is

that within the military we are seeing in recent years horrendous accounts of sexual assault. what this legislation does is say to those women and men who are sexually assaulted in the military that when you get into the va there is going to be quality care for your needs. this legislation also touches on a couple of issues that are not directly related to health care but has overwhelming support in the house and the senate. we have heard from many young veterans who are in colleges as a result of the post-9/11 g.i. bill who right now can't afford to go to college because they are not getting in-state tuition. this legislation addresses that issue. i have talked since i know senator mccain has the gold star wives. these are the women who have lost their husbands in combat

who i think for and not sensible area are not able to take advantage of the post-g.i. bill. they want to build a go to college and this bill addresses that issue. there's another provision which would strongly supported by senator mccain and other republican leaders. senator mccain i am sure will go into it at greater length but essentially what this provision does is says that if you are 40 miles or more further away from a va health care facility or see bach or whatever it maybe you will be a will to go to the doctor of your choice under the strict supervision of the va. what this will do is prevent in some cases in rural areas this is mostly a bill for people in rural areas who now have to travel long distances to get the health care this will make their

lives easier. this is a two-year trial project. we'll see how it turns out but that is in the bill as well. the last point that i want to make is i don't think there's any disagreement in the senate and the among the american people that when you have incompetent people in the va or worse dishonest people in the va they should be removed from their jobs immediately and the secretary of the va should have the power to get rid of them. i don't think there's any debate about that. where there has been some debate in my view is that those employees deserve due process and i say that because i don't want to see a situation where new president comes and and for political reasons fires 400 top executives because they are democrats and republicans or whatever. at own to see a situation where somebody has fired because she's a woman or lack or hispanic or maybe.

that's an underlying motive in that person has no cause of appeal. what we have done is develop an expedited process in terms of dismissal. you will have a week to file an appeal and the appropriate body will have three weeks to rule on your appeal. i think that makes sense. when you think about it does make sense. madam president there are a few other important provisions. its import in my view for the nation to take advantage of the expertise that is out there in the private sector. how do we develop information technology for people accessing the va? we have a commission that would help us do that and we have another presidential commission that will help us with an ongoing problem in the va. madam president that is a brief

overview of what is in the legislation. as a solve all the problems facing our veterans? absolutely not. should we come back and continue to deal with this issue? absolutely but given the crisis we have right now this is important stuff. i want to thank senator mccain. senator mccain's views on many issues are not my views. if you look at the world differently but that is what democracy is about to sit down and work out the best agreement and i think from day one senator mccain showed a desire to reach a compromise. i hope he feels that i did the same. mr. president with that i would yield the floor to senators mccain and thank you very much for his efforts. >> the senator from arizona. >> thank you. i would like to say to the senator from vermont that i respect a great deal the work that he has done on this

legislation. i respect his commitment and his leadership of the veterans affairs committee i respect the fact that ernie sanders is known as a fighter and it's been a pleasure to do combat with him. [laughter] but i also would like to say that at the end of the day the most strongly held views on different aspects of this issue we were able to come together i believe in a way that will help to relieve this terrible tragedy that seems to have a fallen our nation's veterans. it started in phoenix arizona as my colleagues know but it has spread all over the country. it begins with a terrible story of perhaps 40 veterans having literally died for lack of care.

i don't need to go through all of the different problems that have surfaced in the ensuing days since i began but there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that we should accept the word of the inspector general who said these are systemic problems. this is in the scheduling problem. these are systemic problems that need to be addressed and you know our hope as we concluded this legislation is that perhaps we could put some of our other differences aside in this body and move forward and address this legislation as quickly as possible and begin to repair the damage because we have for all intensive purposes in some ways betrayed the brave men and women who were willing to go out in sacrifice for the well-being and

freedom of the rest of us. again i want to say to senator sanders i appreciate his leadership. i appreciate the fact that we both had to make some very tough compromises but i founded my experience that when tough compromises are made usually that's a sign of bipartisanship and a sign that it's a good piece of legislation. i know that isn't the dropper thing to say nowadays in today's political environment but i don't leave if compromises hadn't been made that we would be bringing to the floor of the senate and working with the house with chairman jeff miller over there that we would be doing what we are introducing today. i would also like to say a word about two other individuals and that is senator burr the ranking member the veterans affairs

committee who i admire enormously. he has worked tirelessly on behalf of the veterans. he is the most respected member of our conference and of course our most unique treasure dr. coburn who had been my nominee to take over the veterans administration which almost destroyed along a beautiful friendship. dr. coburn is the conscience of our conference. he is the person that we look up to in it hired the most for his integrity, for his honesty and intelligence. i want to thank both senator burr and dr. coburn for the enormous work. in some ways i am a spokesperson but they really did the great majority of the work. as senator sanders pointed out i would like to cover several

aspects of this legislation and try to explain a little bit why some of these provisions are there. a top priority for me for many years has been to give the veteran a choice. we have to give the veteran a choice the same choice for the people who hold their medicare recipients who have tricare. that's the military health care program where they are outside of 40 miles from the nearest va facilities if there is a wait time which is unacceptable than they should be able to go to their health care provider near their home and not have to get in a van and ride for two or three hours for routine medical care. i also want to emphasize what i hope my colleagues understand that this is no way to comment on the veterans administration

and i will leave that to others judgments. there are things done in the veterans health care system that only the veterans health care system can handle. ptsd, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, prosthesis, war wounds that only the va can do. none of this that we are saying in any way denigrate sword does anything that is some on complementary to the outstanding men and women who work in this system. we are proud of their work. it's the system that needs to be fixed. i don't want anybody who's associated with the veterans administration to believe that we are criticizing them. we are talking about a system that must be fixed. it's urgent that it be fixed. every single day that goes by veterans deprived of his -- that he or she has earned serving this country and that is why i urge my colleagues if you have amendments and you think

you can make this bill better we welcome it created we will be glad to discuss amendments to this legislation. we will be glad if you know how to make it better but in the meantime we have pledged that we are committed to seeing this thing all the way through. i would urge my colleagues to do that. again i know i speak for senator sanders when i say we have to find a way to make this legislation better come on in. but let's not get hung up on certain other aspects of our differences that have characterized what most people would view as grid locking this body. i urge my colleagues to look at this compromise and it is a compromise and see if you think you can make it better we welcome your input but also we would like to have your commitment to seeing this thing

through to the president's desk. i know over on the other side of the capital they are working hard on this issue too. we bring up as i mentioned veterans should have that card and they should be able to go to the facility of his or her choice. accountability. senator rubio and others have introduced legislation and senator sanders has made it i think -- improved on it and this calls for immediate firing if there is evidence of work that is not in keeping with the standards that we expect of our employees and during that period on the appeal that person will not receive a salary. but that person will have due process. seven days to appeal to the mayor system protection board and 21 days for that merit

systems protection board to render a final decision. yes we should have as many of our colleagues want accountability. that accountability also for due process for someone to at least hear their case to be heard. expedited hearing authority for va doctors and nurses and additional authority to hire new providers. there are on obligated funds out there and we are going to use on the gated funds to higher more doctors and nurses where they are needed. i would also point out in some cases doctors and nurses have to work harder where they are. also they are now pending over the years administration requests for 26 major facility leases to be entered into.

this has been the president's request. this has been a bipartisan agreement on the need for these facilities and i believe we should proceed with it. i would also point out to my colleagues this legislation has some expenses. image or expense is to move forward with the construction these major medical facilities all over america. in the view of all that is necessary. this improves the access to health care for individuals who are victims of military sexual assault. sexual assault is probably almost one of the most vexing issues we face in the military today outside of combat. we don't know exact what causes some of this. we do know that many times it's because of the lack of discipline. there's no doubt that this is a problem in the military that

needs to be addressed. otherwise mothers and fathers will be not agreeable. in fact reluctant to have their sons and daughters served in the military unless we address this issue of sexually assaults. there are many efforts going on. in the defense authorization bill in the military in many areas where we are working on this issue but i think this provision of the bill will be very helpful in an attempt to address that issue. a commission needs to be appointed on scheduling. we know one of the problems of scheduling and this whole issue of phantom lists and waiting lists. we have got to get to the bottom of it and i think the smartest people in america could help us on that and another commission on capital planning. what are the needs of our veterans? one of the things we do know is

we have an aging veteran population from world war ii. those that are still with us from korea and vietnam. that's an aging veterans population and requires a different kind of care than those of iraq and afghanistan. to be frank a lot of that is geriatric care. to be frank geriatric care is very expensive but we have got to understand who this population is and what their needs are. just as we have to understand the iraq and afghanistan war veterans and what their needs are. very frankly are planning so far has not been very impressive to me. we need to have, this is a pure senator sanders initiative that va -- va tuition eligibility bill ford

surviving spouses for those who survived in -- in the line of duty. in-state tuition will be provided for veterans at public colleges and universities. finally i want to say thank you to senator sanders and i also want to ask my colleagues again this is not a perfect document. we are ready i think to see any changes that we would consider and perhaps germane amendments but i would also hope that we could focus our attention on the bill and the efforts we need to help our veterans as opposed to other issues which seem to be with us on a daily basis. madam president i yield the floor. >> madam president. >> the senator from vermont. >> i want to thank senator mccain again and i think that is for marks were right on in

terms of describing what is in this legislation and i support his appeal. book everybody has an issue and every time the bill comes up i have my concerns and i can bring forth amendments and senator mccain has his but what we are appealing to right now is if you have the way to improve this bill for our veterans bring forward that amendment but please do not ring forward extraneous amendments. this focus on the needs of veterans. let's not make them political footballs and i hope very much we can proceed in that direction.

>> today the senate will vote on president obama's newest choice to head the department of health and human services. in other words the person who will have impossible task of trying to make obamacare work. by most accounts sylvia burwell is smart and skilled public servant but her embrace of obamacare calls for a policy judgment into question when it comes to the task of implementing this ill-conceived and disastrous loss the president may as well have nominated -- because as i indicated murders burwell has been asked to do the impossible here. obamacare has already inflicted tremendous pain on the lives of countless middle-class americans including many thousands in my own state. it's increasing costs for families across the country despite endless promises to the

contrary. it is reduce access to doctors and hospitals my constituents relied on despite endless promises to the contrary. and it is cause kentuckians to lose the plans they like and wanted to keep despite endless promises in the contrary. like a constituent from alaska county. his constituent wrote to tell me as a result of obamacare he lost his insurance and he was floored when i saw the cost of the obamacare through plan to replace it. with a spike in his premium and a $6300 of taxable he wrote to ask me how he or any working man could afford the affordable care act. he makes an important point. nearly every major obamacare promise from several years ago is a row can obamacare promise today. even more recent promises from the administration can't be

relied on it. and generate the secretary certified to congress this would verify that people were actually eligible for obamacare subsidies before they were set out. in recent weeks we learned from media accounts and testimony that many of the systems needed to protect taxpayers against fraudulent payments still have not been built tested or used. yesterday we learned nearly one in four applications may have been inconsistency that could affect the accuracy of these payments from the american taxpayers. anyways at taxpayer -- tax payment raise from tax increases or rated for medicare to make payouts by mistake or through fraud it's enough to make your head spin. this is just the kind of thing everyone warned about as washington democrats tried to ram this law through. it will only get worse if we give up now and just accept the

giant myth -- massive mated for health health care. the candidate get a web site fixed after spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars how can they relate such a huge sector of our economy in any effective way? token and a administration official possibly repair the broken upon the care promises? the question answer is itself. they can't. the nominee before us can't. no one can. the problem is the law itself. obamacare is what prevents the successful implementation of obamacare. americans don't want it. they want real health reform, reforms that can lower costs increased choice and help the middle class. in my view this senate shouldn't be focusing on the new captain

for the titanic. it should focus on steering away from the iceberg. as hhs secretary the nominee would oversee many important programs aimed at protecting public health promoting medical research and providing a safety net for seniors and working families. she would also be the chief operating officer of obamacare implementation. while it's doing incredible damage to middle-class amos in our country and her embrace of this disastrous was reason enough to oppose her confirmation. i will be voting against this nominee because i think we need to focus on repealing and replacing this loss not trying to do the impossible by pretending we can make it work. >> are there problems with the affordable care act? sure there are. we'll sylvia burwell promised to fix those? you'll provide great leadership.

our lives intertwine in a strange way. i found out when i first met her. i called burstyn -- ruskin bowles and president nominated her. she worked in the white house with erskine bowles when he was chief of staff to president clinton. i called erskine and i said tell me about sylvia matthies burwell and he said i will tell you about sylvia matthies burwell. i have known people that are as good as working with people as sylvia and getting things done. i've not known one person that does all of those three things as well as she does. he told me a story rubin was the secretary of treasury. president clinton was meeting with erskine bowles bob bergman and the secretary of the

treasury and bob rubin had -- sylvia burwell. erskine recounts a story about the president was grilling rubin on a particular issue and secretary rubin was struggling to respond in appropriate way. sylvia matthies burwell the assistant rights and note and hands it discreetly. he re-engages the president on the issue and the president said that is a brilliant insight. that is a great insight. erskine bowles not to be deterred said to the president mr. president silvio wrote a note and gave it to him. if i had people as smart as sylvia on my staff i would look smart too.

this is a gal that grew up in west virginia in the coal-mining town where i lived when i was four years old. her husband steven proposed to her at the bluestone dam on new river where my grandfather and father used to take me as a little way to fish. she later graduated from hinton high school public high school of the coal-mining town. where did she go to school? shoe-in to harvard and after that she was a rhodes scholar and went to oxford. she came out of went to work for a great consulting company. she was doing all kinds of things during the clinton administration as deputy omb director. when we actually had for balanced budgets in a row if you will recall. she knows how to manage. she knows how to manage people and financial resources and she is terrific and working with people.

that is why tom coburn my wing man in terms of leadership on the senate committee and homeland security and governmental affairs came along with jay rockefeller to introduce her for her confirmation hearing before the senate finance committee to endorse her candidacy. i want to thank dr. coburn for doing that. you would expect senator rockefeller to be there. he is a huge fan long-standing but tom coburn and i only got to know her for the last year now. we think she has done a terrific job at omb and she will do a terrific job at the department of health and human services but i want to say a special thank you to her parents who are still alive and live in west virginia. the real thank you for raising doubt one but two young women including sylvia's younger sister stephanie instilling values and the kind of education

that have enabled them both to go on to do extraordinary things with their lives. i wanted to say thank you to steven who propose marriage to then sylvia matthews at the bluestone dam on the new river all those years ago. i want to thank him for sharing his wife at their country. the start tough and demanding jobs and in some cases thankless jobs. he is willing to take on extra responsibilities as a dad to help raise the children who were under the age of 10. i think matthew was maybe four years old and they know that their mom is changing jobs and they know she still has a job. it's a huge job. is there work to do? sure there is. is there work to do in implementing the affordable care act? sure there is but i will close with this. to my republican friends and i love them all my republican friends moan and groan about the

enormous burden the affordable care act is putting on the american people. i asked how are you doing and he said compared to what? if things are so bad now with the affordable care act lets just say compared to what? here is where we were three or four years ago. the country of japan spends 8% of their gdp on health care. 8% of gross domestic product on health care. we spent 18 until recently. the affordable care act they got that her results. higher rates of longevity and better results in some respects and we didn't in telecouple of years ago. and in japan they cover everybody. until this year we had 40 million people who went to bed at night that did not have

health care coverage. i regret anybody who was inconvenienced or disadvantaged at all because the adoption of the affordable care act. i really regret all those folks in this country tens of millions of them who didn't have access to health care. i really regret the fact that all those people on medicare never had a second physical. they have got one they would have had a much better life. millions of senior citizens who fell into the doughnut hole and stop taking their medicines and got sick and had to be hospitalized and ended up in nursing homes. i feel badly for them. my dad used to say instead of moaning about your problems, fix them. fix them. there are plenty of things we can do to make the affordable care act better and i know what they are but the idea of saying that we have to go back to where we were that's not a good thing.

that's not a good thing in delaware and i don't think it's a good thing in kentucky. he has provided great leadership to make sure the hundreds of thousands of people who need health care habit today who didn't have it before and we want to make sure the opportunity that they realize in that state and those states that don't have the opportunity have no exchange to sign up in the noakes mention of the medicaid program my hope is that they will look to kentucky as an example into delaware as the example to see what we can do for our people. last point. most of the people who serve here are people of faith. some are protestants and some are catholics and some are jewish and different religions but most people are people of faith. most of our scriptures have a couple of things in common.

one of the things they have in common is the golden rule. the chaplain gives the opening prayer most of the days we are in session and the golden role is treat people the way we want to be treated and love thy neighbor as we love thyself. it's a quayle of the new testament. i don't don't care if you are practicing catholic jewish muslim hindu buddhist almost all of them have something like the golden rule in their scriptures. in the new testament in the book of matthew, matthew 25 there something that we have all heard not everybody knows it and can't believe it's in the bible but it is. the scripture talks about when i was hungry did you feed my? when i was thirsty did you give me a drink? when i was due to closed me? when i was sick and imprisoned did you come to see my? matthew 25 doesn't say anything

about when i had no health care or when i had to depend on emergency room for health care when i got really sick. and it's have to someone else had to pay for an hospital. i was hospitalized for a long while. it doesn't say that in matthew 25. but the intent is the same. where were you? we were here and we voted to try to do something about it to make sure people did have better access to health care and we can improve on what we have done and we need to do that. we have a moral imperative to our society to look out for them and to help them look out for themselves as well. we also have a fiscal imperative to get our budget constraints to me that imperative in a fiscally responsible way. sylvia matthew burwell understands that as well as anybody i know. she is demonstrated that in her leadership at omb. i hope that my colleagues

democrat and republican will follow the leadership of senator tom coburn republican from almost -- oklahoma and a swingman tom carper democrat from delaware who is supporting this nomination. with that i yield back the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. cbs this afternoon we are going to vote on the nomination of ms. burwell to be secretary of hhs. i'm going to support that nomination. i take the floor now to other people to some problems that i think she is going to face and hopefully she can correct them. .. em. it's our responsibility to make sure that those are enforced according to the intent of congress. when they aren't, we have a responsibility to point that

out. that's what i will be doing. and i hope that these things i point out along with what other colleagues will be saying this morning, she will be able to correct. but we also have a situation but we also have a situation we also have a situation where congress passed the affordable care act, and in that process the president has done a lot of things the some of us think are illegal and maybe in some cases on constitutional and hopefully she, as a new director, will make sure that those practices do not continue. when ms. burro was nominated i said that anyone put in charge of obamacare will be set up to fail. that theme of this law really has been by any means necessary.

in other words, whatever it takes to get this program under way does not really matter what the law says. the president can fix it, and he has done at 38 times. surely sometimes contrary to what the law says and then contrary to what he took an oath to do as of poland the laws of this country. the legislative process certainty -- certainly is by no means necessary. if you want to change it, change it. the implementation of this law has operated similarly. the department that we are conceding the spur well to lead has ignored statue whenever was

considered necessary. don't come the congress to strip to yourself. deadlines are considered to be written in pencil. it is a statute needed to be creatively reinterpreted to make the program work, the department of hhs did so. now, that still continues today and consequently why i am pleading with the spur well to change things. the department is supposed to employment the employee mandate, you're overdue. significantly altered from the statute. the department is supposed to employment this year, though legal authority to distribute funds is questionable and the standards used to make those distributions will likely be kept quite quiet. and speaking of things that will

be kept quiet, congress is going to want to know what the premiums will be next year for health insurance. we consider the information very important and relevant. my state of viola is considered to be one of the state's most of risk for premiums bikes. the department will want to use any means necessary to hide the premiums until after the november elections unless, of course, the premier numbers are good. and are sure that a rival shop them from rooftops, much as they did with enormous numbers. we have heard over and over again about a moment numbers, but the enrollment numbers to not tell the whole story : not even close. i was under the impression that the law was supposed to increase coverage at lower cost. so far that is not the case.

the independent research firm mckinsey found that 74 percent of the people getting coverage through obamacare plans were previously insured. if those numbers are accurate, that means one and four people getting coverage were previously uninsured. certainly that is what i hear from my constituents. they have had to change their coverage, and often that coverage has been much more expensive. furthermore, the mackenzie research also found that the majority of people who shop for an obamacare plan but did not purchase the plan cited affordability as a number one reason for not buying an insurance. a poll released by kaiser foundation found that roughly four and ten and a short americans named affordability as

their primary reason for going without health insurance. it is not working as it was intended. so, i hope ms. burr world will change the relationship with the department has with the congress i hope she will be willing to break the by any means necessary mine said that we have seen in the past five years. i hope she does not disappear into the bunker rare in an office building and that we will never hear from her again, but her challenge is very severe. the law appears to be shifting around the previously insured more than it is covering the previously uninsured. but the previously uninsured are citing cost as the primary reason for not purchasing insurance. i will support the nomination of ms. burr well today and hope down the road several months h'm

that i'm not sorry i did that. i think she is a person that has the capability to turn things around and that she will. the law remains far from being worthy of support. i yield the floor. >> the ranking member of the budget committee and have worked with mrs. buhr well. now just 13 months. i think she served in the tremendously important position of director of budgets. i do not believe that she is the -- has the background, quality, and experience proven managerial required at the department of health and human services. she has 500 people working in the budget office, and that is an import office.

over 70,000. she once served on a board of local hospital. it just simply is not the person that we need today to bring order out of the disarray that we have in the health care system of this country and the total collapse of integrity and consistency in the implementation of obamacare. and there are a couple of things i care about by really think that it is time for this administration to stop moving around insiders call political allies, and put some people in these critical positions capable of operating them have the highest possible. mrs. buhr well violated the medicare triggered, for example. the medicare issue, a report that is headed to insolvency. it is a critical matter. the administration, by law, is

required within two weeks to submit a plan to fix medicare, and they have been submitting this report for years. the president's director on this promise orwell was the person responsible for submitting medicare legislation to congress. we ask for a route that before she was confirmed. during a hearing she said she would do everything in her power to comply with the federal law. yet despite this assurance she refuses peephole to comply with all law and never submitted a plan. don't we need a plan to fix medicare? tell we need their chief executive of america through the budget director to submit a plan to fix it? she also violated the law and the night congress needed transparency with respects to the health care law, the obamacare law. so the ominous appropriations bill signed the law in january

required hhs to include in its f y15 budget that detailed accounting of standing to implement the house floor. the budget director for the agency that she now heads submitted sufficient and permission to comply with that. and i just would say, my time is up among mr. president, but i would just a that i am very much taken with mrs. buhr world. she is a delightful person. many of my colleagues think highly of her. somberly think that she would do a good job about this is not the right position for her. this government is drifting in the disarray in a host of ways. we need the strongest possible capable leader with proven health care managerial experience for the good of america and for the good of president. this is not the right nominee,

and i thank the chairman. >> sylvia burr well was approved by the senate to the health and semen services secretary 78-17 with 24 republicans voting yes. to link to the results and see how individual senators voted go to our website. >> speaking in brussels president obama said that he made absolutely no apologies for getting the sergeant released. here is portion of the president's remarks at a news conference with british prime minister david cameron. >> i'm not this partial to coor's. we will repeat what i said two days ago. we have a basic principle. we do not leave anybody wearing the american uniform behind.

we have a prisoner of war his health deteriorated, and we were deeply concerned and saw an opportunity and seized it. i make no apologies for not. we had discussed with congress the possibility that something like this might occur, but because of the nature of the folks there we were dealing with and the fragile nature of these negotiations, we felt it was important to go ahead and do what we did. and we are now explaining to congress the details of how we move forward. but this basic principle that we don't leave anybody behind and is basic recognition that that often means prisoner exchanges of the enemy's is not unique to my administration. dates back to the beginning of our republic.

and with respect to how we announced it, i think it was important for people to understand that this is not some obstruction, not a political football. you have a couple of parents whose kids volunteered to fight in a distant land they have not seen in five years and were not sure whether there would never see again. as commander in chief of the united states armed forces i am responsible for those kids. i get letters from parents to say, if you are, in fact, some in my child to work make sure that that child is being taken care of. the right to mail letters to folks who unfortunately did not see their children again after fighting. i made absolutely no apologies for making sure that we get back

a young man to his parents and that the american people understand apart this is somebody whose child and that we don't condition whether or not we make the effort to try to get them back. >> washington journal focusing on president obama's three country four day trip to europe. the 70th anniversary. washington journal is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> russia and united states is an nation which her believes in its mission. we believe in free.

we believe and distribution. would suddenly disappeared in the 90's and 2000's, but it did not go anywhere, you know. it was still there. and the biggest turn all those years was the victory day. that is our main nation holiday. and that is what unites the whole nation, the fight. and how it was presented to the nation by president proven is that in ukraine those on weapons. and illustrated that with the flag of former ukrainian liberation army who were allied with the sense during world war

two. and so we use that to prove that these are fascists who are fighting against russian and ukrainian nation. so we are looking just to protect russians behoove. no. the overwhelming majority of russians, we are continuing and liberating ukraine from the fascist threat. >> this weekend a look into the politics saturday morning at 10:00 eastern. on c-span2 book tv live 2-day coverage of the chicago tribune perjures role if the starting saturday at 11:00 a.m. eastern and on c-span three american history tv, the 70th anniversary of the d-day invasion of normandy beginning saturday morning at 1030 east and. >> as the u.s. presence in afghanistan is winding down some intelligence assessments of one

al qaeda and other terrorist groups are beginning to resurface. next, the american enterprise institute hosted discussion on the current capabilities and threats of al qaeda. this is 90 minutes. >> thank you, everyone for joining us here today. thank you. thank you for joining is here today. we are going to start. i would like to welcome you on this beautiful afternoon. co-sponsored with the foreign policy research institute. i am thankful that they are here . i am catherine zimmerman, senior analyst and i have been working on al qaeda for the past five years. i am hoping that this will be a very interesting discussion.

they give us their views on the al qaeda challenge. mary just joined us here. she is publishing her book knowing the enemy next year. and she just published a report called getting a right to available. senior fellow at the foreign policy research institute and published expense to the excessively on transnational threats. the cia studies on intelligence. work available through the website and also the blog which she is an editor of. i will be moderating the discussion. keep your answers short. i am really looking forward to what has proved to be a lively discussion.

so just ask the basic question. >> thanks for having me here. given me a lot of room to run and write a lot of crazy stuff over the years. i really appreciate that. i'm going to start off with some of my favorite. jan and i love this one because how can you know if you're winning if you have no idea of what al qaeda is? this is a difficult position we are in, and it is not just us try to figure out. al qaeda is trying to figure out who is in al qaeda. what you see right there is person on the coast of kenya. i'm not authorized to speak about that.

we pledged loyalty. and then, that does not mean if you give someone the of the loyalty they have to keep follow them if they're wrong. take their course of action we want general of the. is that osama bin laden? it is osama bin laden. and so this is sort of the tunnel that is going on right now. the funniest thing about our discussion is al qaeda might very well be the second most important group in the world today. in the past three weeks cells have been disrupted in saudi arabia. you have the juice -- jewish museum sugar is being linked to was going on.

does not like he was commanded. and then just two days ago he had reports from germany that they disrupted. none of this was commanded or lead by al qaeda central. let's say we want to know about major league baseball. being the single, how long the cardinal's dying. but the cardinals, while the center of the baseball universe and 95 percent of what is going on are one of only 26 teams in. so what i'm talking about is al qaeda, and i wrote this, the dominant force. there were the ones leading. they call themselves the vanguard. they led that g. harding movement. today they are one of many.

there are still the one that i call old guard. you will hear me refer to that today. i have no doubt right now somewhere they are planning attacks against the united states. no doubt they're trying to communicate with affiliates. i am sure that they are, but the way that is received today verses the way that was received his law of the different. and so when we talk about al qaeda, will call them old guard, those that are still committed to the original objectives and are still focused on four in attacks against the u.s. i tried to be as specific as possible because you will see when i get to this part, i talked about how we have to focus our strategy. a couple dozen old guard committed operatives, al qaeda

central, al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, the most important al qaeda element in the world at this point have demonstrated and repeated capabilities to do external operations attack and the u.s. i have no doubt they're planning an attack against his right now, no doubt whatsoever. they are the decisive point in the future. we will come to that. certain key leaders that are running the actual 8qi am cells that are out there, and if you're want to know how they're trying to communicate, there's this document out there. i am worried about those folks. sort of the off the reservation to my running my own group. and that indirect contact. select members hoopla's loyalty in 2012 are still running

external operations. abbey has seen it is still concerned about them. and most important now and into the horizon, they are the new base of the future generation for what will come out if they can keep moving on. the other two things that i will worry about our old guard al qaeda operatives that uc floating around in syria. there will try and coordinate with the as long from. but some of your are americans that are floating in joining. so we have the suicide bomber from florida last week. the suicide bomber. that i am really worried about. so when i talk about al qaeda, that's the story that i am most concerned with soul to this day and that means what al qaeda is.

>> same question for use as you just published a report. what to the kern definition. think that it might be useful. >> the administration is actually quite constrained and narrow. according to that al qaeda is those people who carried out 9/11, of very tiny little group of people. somewhere in afghanistan, pakistan. and from their planning and carrying out attacks.

they mean very loosely aligned groups that share some of the goals but not all the. have their own agendas. compose their vision of very extremist. that is the definition that is used. that is the way it al qaeda itself to finds itself. with the little bit of skepticism. so how does al qaeda define itself? define itself as an organization and ideology.

guys under them who are subversively doing with the want them to. bleeped organically. so the argument that they have is this organization gives orders. people down try to obey them. there are other people. you're supposed to obey just as let's say the king of france had whole lot. and then along with that there are personal connections.

his personal connection. but along with that there is also the ideology that links them together. the methodology the specific version of circassia. here's the thing about that. sometimes we get lucky and you have people they say things like we are a part of al qaeda. you have some sort of dispute or discussion going on. you're not really al qaeda.

they have indeed swan of the fealty. some of the documents that were found after northern mali was liberated. one of the things that was found was document. and what that said was they actually were al qaeda the whole time. don't say anything about your connections to anything having to do with al qaeda or a global agenda. that's messaging, the firm you want.

you don't give in the glasses into the real relationships that are going on with people allows people leak things. so have -- the ideology. ideology or creed and dispersion the interesting thing, the is lined state, in sort of breakaway group once had a relationship the argument they're having was specifically about men hunched, specifically the methodology that was being used by al qaeda. disagree profoundly with it. and for that reason they broke

away. your ideology and methodology. the ideologies of al qaeda. slightly different take. >> i put that out right away. ideology is valuable. these guys never they want to change it will. and that is what's going on. if you follow there's a lot of debate between al qaeda and ices . he says, no, i kind of did.

the justification right now for what they can suicide bomb that kent suicide bombings their picking and around shakespeare recede is a debate going on in pakistan, which is fascinating. they pledged loyalty. just last week in a public statement precluding these nine. that ideology is valuable and will change based on the connections on the ground and the situation in the power plays. three years ago everyone would tell me that the ideal as you was so blinded that there would never be.

the first one is somalia. it became more severe with. all sorts of connections. they want to pledge loyalty. he was really nervous about those guys, for good reason probably. and as you read some, the talk about it two or three times, power plays about who was pledging. they would use that as a tool to corral all of these underneath sometimes with them, sometimes against them. what is going on, they can't control it.

personnel and resources problems arise, loyalty and ideology will shift. limited communication. when you keep sending a message is the message and it takes three weeks you start giving your own interpretation of the ideology the the number one threat is of a jihad is.

this us. ideology, resonated command the as monday. did you have now? not a lot of fun. kind of a bad loss. verismo china made plans of these affiliate's. and so what happens? he can communicate with them on a routine basis. the smartest thing he did to which he did try to do, was nominating the emir why? this is game of the roads.

what did he do that to try to keep that in line. he did not have that. a lot of connections. he did that. that was a strategic power play. the only one that would give him something. they don't go. if you want to know the area to do is look at where the books are. reminds me of where we were told years ago. a highly stylized ideology we're pursuing will we call terrorists who have week or different intensive ability commitments.

instead we were probably making more of them. we were providing impetus. we made a second-generation. whether we like it and not. that's what happened. this created this enormous dissension in the right because they're is a lot of the tension between the first generation, that group from afghanistan's and they all have physical relationships with each other. then missed out on the second generation. the differences is targeting, direction, and ideology and

think the ideology is a wild area we can say some of the place. the commitment to different forces. so that's sort of my take. >> just to respond to the idea that ideologies is not how we see al qaeda. now it is changed how the differentiate between to read some minor key part of that court. >> just starting their 12 years

ago ideology was dismissed by most people. what the masters and the dow was g autism. people engaged. that is really all they cared about. it did not distinguish between different groups. in fact, they find the threat so broadly, tom's of groups that were not intend. the methodology. i would say actually there is very little attention paid to it . when people began to be interested in ideology and distinguished. so instead of seeing any group that engages is a danger to the united states, they began to see which proves have an ideology

that compels them to attack the united states first? that is part of the al qaeda methodology and ideology, to attack the added states rather than other local governments. so by looking at that there were able to distinguish among troops and actually narrow the definition of the enemy from the broad expanse of definition they had. but getting back to this question of whether ideology is even a board, pragmatism absolutely plays a role in nearly everything. there is an extremely pragmatic group, especially when it comes to military matters. you read some of those things airbrushed san antonio car rode his master's thesis on jobs about that job was a model to follow.

so of -- you will able to do the same thing. pragmatic when it comes to military matters, economic matters. a lot of different issues. you will notice that the examples you gave where all about actually engaging with each other and arguing over ideology. if ideology really doesn't matter why would they do that? is one thing the say someplace in the depths of your heart, not doing this because of ideology, but engage in this kind of public debate and make ideology the center for your argument when you don't actually believe that has some significance. so ideology was the motivation for a 700 page book called the exoneration in which he took on the argument of one of his mentors, one of the sort of

godfather's and argued against his ideological interpretation to show people where he had gone astray, the very first middle park and the end part, all about the ideological justification. as i mentioned, the main dispute is about their change in creed and methodology and the engagement in the ideological struggle over the future of al qaeda. and the implications of that, the particular methodology that they have chosen to follow follows that of those are cali. some people call this the split. he believes upset you should take care not to kill innocent

civilians spots. in other words, who talked about not killing civilians, but it was going to make you give up an operation that was really worth it to my believe you should just wed with it. you killed 50 innocent moslems and one american, that was perfectly fine. he also believed invoking and causing a sectarian gore. killing in order the set of the sectarian. they purposely set up costs is addition of methodology and creed, it's perfectly fine for a steven. people like the justifications for doing that.

on the other hand, they have consistently constantly said that it is wrong to kill innocent moslems, and he put a lot of pressure on those who have sworn to live up to that. and the change that we have seen as a result of that in places like somalia where, if you remember, they carry out the horrible terrorist attack. one of the things they did was attempt to figure out who was the muslim, who was not before they started randomly shooting people. but they actually asked people the set of questions to try to figure out before they carry out terror attack. nobody had done anything like this before you put out his statement saying this is what you're going to do and here is the sure readjust vacation. those who follow our methodology are going to be doing this.

bitter complaints. the spokesman. you have left the original methodology and are following in their footsteps, and you're not going to change this. for him ideology actually matters. now, three examples. an argument. let's start. suggested and they seemed to be taking direction from al qaeda because that came out, a public statement about these are the things we want to do. and this occurred several months after it cannot. make an argument, but it sounds like they're actually doing. more importantly, all those things you mentioned of got away

all the people who are going to leave have either left or been killed. and just recently there reaffirmed their allegiance twice. at a terrible argument. and the head of a group. called itself -- signed themselves and blood. and don't know what you want to call them that. i guess that was what he thought best. terrible argument. even more clearly than enhance and press reports. but what also became clear over time is the something that happened to settle this.

they went off and joined. not made the head of a new group but was put off someplace else. and in other words, he was willing to be under someone else and was willing to, again, swear his allegiance to al qaeda just a month ago. so end of april, april 30th, he also came forward. i have my allegiance to al qaeda central. and finally when it comes the major argument that is going on is between ice and the breakaway group. the guys who have definitely declared their allegiance. what other groups are signing up ... verses those letters signing up.

and the results are about 20 of 30 to one verses those of her son in an. >> i think we will circled back. i actually want to come back to the point made about pragmatism. setting aside the ideologies and actually looking at the leaders on the ground. part of your argument, and correctly of vermont. over the past few years what happened, the arabs offering. the centralization. a lot more autonomy, and now they essentially harsh self funded, self starters, and kind of like the generation. looking to center around. so how does that play into a al qaeda?

what actually is the state of al qaeda today? is the corporation incoordination, or are we looking about more of the individualized actor? >> al qaeda is getting killed today for the same reasons that we get worried about our young employees. it is fascinating to watch. if you're familiar, it's really the one that was putting it together. they could kind of keep -- back in 2006 and seven, the internet is the panacea. it is helpful to branch out and get the message out there. but has the internet has evolved into the social media, this 2-way engagement it is honorable course in the way when we want to control message. so white house employee the starts a bogus twitter account, starts comments and you see stuff like this all the time, we're having a hard time right

now, and our tow you to read to things that are really excellent , for understanding how things are playing out, not just with al qaeda but in terms of terrorism in general. the first on, the terrorist the lama. a great discussion about how they play against each other, and he deconstruction from this al qaeda thing we have been talking about. how al qaeda is really just one group and that there are all these sorts of debates about direction and pragmatism. so if you want to know what al qaeda central those well, it comes down to just a few things. success worse is failure. the reason that they have to compete right now to be top dog.

their external attack happened back in 2005 that al qaeda attack. they're not taking tons of credit for young fighters are motivated right now are going. it's a wonder. they're doing a tax. really attracted. they are really excited about it. some of the push back, you guys have not succeeded in putting together state. it has been us out here working on it. the other thing year after a number, as truckers are no, how old were they? they were young. this is something they saw and knew about. it was in their communities. success has not been held

strictly within the old guard. being achieved by a lot of different groups. if you are one you have better be hitting home runs. it's a reciprocal relationship. the presence of an accident, which is resources you see people all the way out until is death : and essentially asking him both for strategic taxes. what did the great if you could cough up a hundred bucks? there's still that discussion in the background about resource allocation. interest in things under their to show that kind of network and control. he does not have it. and greg johnson your rowboat, got a great "and there. just like all the others except yet one thing there was different. he had money in a out organized a resource. when you go back to the 90's we have this national geographic special about how and

originated. but then when you look, on the man. i am the leader and. and so successfully to draw brought a lot of them together. senses' lead that has really been distributed. your your resource in. year-on-year around. resource in on the wrong. you and our right now in syria of one to. we can literally pledge money to a group. so as resource control is limited, he starts to do more of what you want. we have to keep the connection that and keep that going. political. the next burger want to make sure we talk about as a physical relationship. we deceive ourselves in the thinking of the internet would keep all of the adherents around 2005 to seven were to reach of

the. we were wrong. the power of the legion is really what's going on. you see it with the militias that have risen out. the parallel. fascinating discussions about entered austria doing something really great. he is a really unique dynamic going on in those legions critical importance for understanding. the first one, the foreign fighters from libya and tunisia. i will just show where this rift is. so these are some scenarios are will talk about a second.

foreign fighters from libya and tunisia. you see the debate. still in. they're screening the foreign fire recruits. they are being much smarter. but if you can win over the resources. this is as john gerard now, you can whenever the people, don't command the resources, a very, very bad situation. our way out through scenarios.

the first one is that you could see the to emerge. old guard and the ones that they have the connections with and then over time all of these sort of foreign buyers and motivated. with that you will still have a lot of these groups now that are just waiting in out. some people interpret this as, pledged loyalty. others like 30 groups of oil, but if i'm not giving money and he's not communicating with me that much and that all will need to pick sides the woman who says if hot appealing to do? a place a metal. the sahara, nigeria, somalia, or heads the men cannot commit. we notice from elections and our own country. wait to see the candid it is.

that is an aerial number one. scenario number two which is what i think is going on today. these are three scenarios. anyone tells you they are an expert, you should show them. there's way too much going on a bunch of different groups that are battling any sort of connections. the sustained internal civil war . it sounds great. this is the scenario right now. fighting the average ec, they're all fighting each other. kurds in the next. if i'm strictly for my counter-terrorism perspective, you guys are all chewing yourselves up in a meat grinder. the effect of the long run, i don't want to donate a bunch of

money and you're going to kill other jockeys. if you are foreign fighters starting to say i thought i was just coming here to participate and be part of al qaeda. i'm mostly attacking my brothers had that corrosive effect. ec foreign fighters be coming back. this is the key issue. europe should be worried, so should north africa. deasy these guys coming back because they are disillusioned with what's going on. it does not mean that there will be committed to violence. but the civil war has a corrosive effect. the third one is that there is some much infighting that you stick with where you can resources and where you can communicate. where does that really happened? regionally. so you see groups like shibani working with other groups in kenya, and they work together, they occasionally have contact and communicate. i don't doubt that.

and they sort of swarm around. you will see this. hq i am. they'll communicate. a lot of the young veterans. what you might see is all three of these scenarios that play out of sequence. i don't know what it will be. i would love to have all the counter-terrorism analysts put their bets down. it would be fast and see who would be right in the end. really think we will probably see a civil war first, maybe some version. although the kind of act down. there won't. and then maybe just conglomerates over the longer run. those are some of those scenarios and where i see al qaeda going. what old guard al qaeda needs to do is start getting on top of foreign fighter recruitment to muster securing resources and

distributing. they have to make a plot to become the dominant player. if i was al qaeda old guard al qaeda i would be going through and attack israel ..

>> it is a core and he has been having this