going to conference with the senate. so i think if we return to regular order rather than havino policies dictated from the top on both sides, we would go a long way towards fixing this. another thing we suggested is having five-day work weeks which a lot of americans go, what? five-day work weeks in washington. we recommend that for three weeks out of the, three weeks out of four, that the house and senate synchronize their calendars so they're in session at the same time. right now the calendars seem to be set by leadership on the house and senate side without any real consideration as to what the other side's doing. how can you be productive if half the team is out of town? and so we say, let's work five days at a time for three straight weeks. that also means that you probably have to stay in washington a little more. and then you take one week off to either go back to your district and work with your constituents in your states. or you can take family time, whatever you need. then come back for -- you are elected to be a full-time

senator or house member. and so this is something else that we strongly recommend. >> host: our guest is henry bonilla. former congressman, served in congress until 2007, representing texas. number for republicans is 202-585-3881. for democrats, 202-585-3880. and independents, 202-585-3882. wonder if you talk to us a little bit about how this report and your recommendations are being received in congress today. >> guest: we haven't had any strong feedback yet. sometimes it take as while for messages to get into the leadership office. the former senators that led this, this on their side have already communicated with the senate leadership but no strong reaction yet. the house side. but we're hoping that at least someone listens to us because at this point we're not aware of anyone who is put together a set of recommendations like this

anywhere. so, if half of them are implemented that would beik a he success. if one or two, hey, great. butge we're realistic about this most of us who worked on this have been in this town for a long time and we understand reality. >> host: as someone who has been in washington a long time and understands the way these things work and there are interesting ideas and given things are so polarized around how do you get them to come to pass and people agree to anything? >> guest: we're on the outside. reputations a. lot of leaders on this commission have they're able to get this at least in front of the right people in congress. >> host: first call in north carolina. cecilis on the line for independents. >> caller: yes, i enjoy the program c-span and at my age, 83,an born in 1930, my dad was single provider of the family and we, everybody was in the

same circumstances, but, the problem we have today is that it takes two people to earn an income to put a roof over your head and, and out of the depression i've had the situations where i grew up where i had to help my dad after school. so it to got to the point where he was only working two days a week and we worked things out. now research and development and the way this country developed this last century, was when we made ouras fortune. we found out we could make a lot of money. now we're misdirected and we've goret an idea where we're two people earning an income and a family, which is not exactly right because it should be as it started before and, working out of that depression, we became

more fish end and -- efficient and, you know, research and development. new products came out of the war. so i things have changed in this country and not for the best. >> guest: well, i appreciate your comments. i'm not sure what his question is but again, this commission was set up to try to work through some of the difficulties. the gentleman mentioned the difficulty of working things through as a family and some of the parallels can be drawn from a family interaction in washington as well. this is not an institution made up of a bunch of buildings and just simply bureaucracies. people run this operation in washington and i think a lot of principles couldn be learned fm families who have had to get it done over the years. >> host: talk about the process atou the bipartisan policy centr that you went through to create this report. was this public input, come to

meeting of the minds, how did that work? >> guest: we had meetings at four locations around the country to hash through some ideas and there were disagreements among our group and we served as volunteers in the last year to do this sometimes we would have very heated discussions about political fund-raising for example. one of the recommendations we make is that to have only, to limit political fund-raising for pacsli to only three pacs for the leadership members and senators in d.c. because, right now, you find yourself, if i was still in congress, i would probably be spending close to half of my time just politicalng for your action committee, for your campaign committee, for the congressional political action committee that you have to support. for your republican national committee, your democratic national committee. sometimes your states come in as well for fund-raising. so you're just calling all the time. you're holding events all the

time. you're doing dinners every night you're supposed to be a legislator. we understand completely. i did the fund-raising as i needed to but it really got -- there are leadership pacs i hear being formed already by members who have not even been elected yet. so iem think it has gotten a little bit out of control. >> host: houston, texas, mike on the line for republicans. >> caller: good morning. good morning congressman. >> guest: good morning. >> caller: my thought is we have bicameral legislature with a senate and a house and there apparently have been 230 bills the house has passed that have not yet and will not receive a vote up or down by the senate. and, i would recommend that the senate with harry reid running interference very well for president obama. a very valuable tool for obama to keep the senate. that is his number one

motivation at the end of the year. the second point though, is in the house, his sheila jackson-lee, who is my representative, she has offered 29 amendments to bills in the house gop bills and entire senate the gop has offered nine. nine since 2010. so that is a dramatic difference in cooperation between the house gop and democrats there versus the senate where harry reid rules with an iron fist. >> well, again ace pointed out in my remarks from the beginning of the senator that i quoted, happens to be a democrat and i mentioned it is the most unproductive time of his life being in the u.s. senate. there has been a change in culture in terms of what amendments are allowed on both d senate side. the statistics really skewed to thee. minimum or lowest levels ever for amendments in the senate. so you're right to talk about the dysfunction that doesn't even allow bills to be voted on,

and i thinksf there is a lot of frustration, again not just on one side politically but on both sides, i don't care what party you come from, we're elected to come here to washington, you would like to try to have your ideas presented and to see how people would feel about them, not just in terms of debating but in terms of voting and so there is a tremendous amount of frustration because the leadership does control what goes to the floor on both the house side and senate side. and i think you're right, you sound like you have studied some of the statistics in the last few years and the number of bills and amendments that have come forward to be presented, even to allow them to debate and have votes on them has sunk to new lows. >> host: michael in manchester township, new jersey, is on the line for democrats. >> caller: how are youin doing. i'm on line for independents actually. >> host: sorry abouten that. >> caller: no problem. i haven'ort really heard anythig from, from the guest today

except giving more days off for these guys but, i would like to see eventually, when it's possible a system where each individual american can vote on each individual topic or, you know -- immigration and so on. if we could have each individual americanli voting on each individual discussion then we can get rid of some of this nonsense. i'm a littlee bit worried about possibly the republicans taking more control of the senate. >> guest: i think the gentleman is suggesting that the american public vote on each and every issue that occurs up mere. that is not going to happen. first ofy all, that system is

just, i've never heard of suggestion like that before but i think, you know, people would understand, regardless of what side you're on politically, that is why you elect your member of congress and your senator, to represent you in washington, to vote on these issues. i would imagine that most americans would understand that if, let's say you have 100 issues come up, ranging from immigration to health care, to budget bills and veterans issues and all of that you would wind up going, going to the polls almost every other day and that is, not realistic. >> host: let's go to columbus, georgia, where eric is on the line for democrats. >> caller: goodli morning. >> host: good morning. >> caller: i just want to make a comment that you know, gridlock is not anything new to, you know the united states. i think as far as we have, we have a divided government where

democrats at this point, we control the house and we control the senate rather, and you know the presidency and republicans hold the house. so you're going to have inherent gridlock when you have that type of a system. if you go back to obama's, the first term, you they, the first congressional term back in 2008 and-2010, you know democrats got a lot done because we controlled both the house and, the senate and the presidency. so we were able to get a lot more done. i think, you know, until that happens again, you're going to have this gridlock panned that is my comment. thank you. >> guest: i appreciate the comment. when either party holds dominance over both branches of government, the executive and legislative branch yout will see things done more

quickly. reality that doesn't happen. you sit down with the other side, we have 10 issues here and agree on seven and put three on the shelf or eight of them or whatever and get it done? so yeah, ideally for either party they would like dominance in, in the congress around in the white house but that does not happen all that often in our country historically. >> host: we're talking with former congressman henry bonilla who ising on the bipartisan policy center commission on political reform. to join the conversation this morning, number for publics, 202-558-3881. for democrats, 202-585-3880. and independents, 58. next up, in wilmington, north carolina, alexis on the line for independents. >> good morning. >> host: good morning. >> caller: i would like to understand from the guest speaker, what it is that has

people so against the wall? there is absolutely no wiggle room whatsoever for anyone to express a original idea or, i mean, i'm so sick of this obamacare and all of the bills that are presented and the waste of time that takes in and off the floor. you know, to be created and it is so wasteful. i mean there is so much to be done. they talk about wanting to get jobs, you know? >> host: you're still there. >> caller: okay. you're wanting to get jobs created but more bills suggest that. something ast simple as a background check for gun control. you were talking before about,

you know, the legislators are there to represent the people. all the polls show that the people support it. and yet, it doesn't even come to a vet. it is crazy. i don't get it. something you can explain about this system. >> guest: well, you're right about the contentious atmosphere that we all live in now in this country and, you have these votes, i know the previous guest on just a few minutes before me had to listen to some very contentious comments of people that were very worked up about the topic at hand and that was obamacare. however you feel about it. it is an issue of strong passion and evisceral reaction and, you're right, there probably are too many votes right now that are dedicated just to trying to repeal it and whatever. you know, i've always been of the state of mind that, hey, if you, if you're on the opposite side of something that has passed, the game's over, for at

least that session. it might not be over when there's a new congress or a new president but while this is in place, game over. you look at the scoreboard. so if you keep trying to replay the gamee, over and over, in my view, you're wasting a lot of time. wait fortr an opportunity perhas in another session when there might be some progress on the position you'repp advocating. but there are other issues. you brought up the gun control issue. that is one of the most passionate issues that comes up all across the country and, but you have to remember that generally polls that are held that go from coast to coast may not apply in a particular congressional area in a particular state. they could be skewed very differently. so just because you have an overall poll that support as particular issue like gun control does not mean that is the case in every case and every congressional district. and that is why you often times see contrasts between what the

populace is saying overall from coast to coast and what actual happens in d.c. >> host: one of the areas you all have made a very significant number of recommendations is in reforming the electoral system. one includes creating a national congressional primary day in june. other efforts to increase voter turnout. talk about that category. what do you thinkef in that category is the most realistic? >> guest: the states have to act on these. we put these out on the table to have a national primary day in june, sol you don't have these things peaking and who is fighting to go first especially in a presidential year. everyone is jockeying for super tuesday or whatever primaries are remaining in august and september. so we suggest, can't we just at least have the states consider having one day so it all gets done at once? then people don't have to be jockeying back and forth between washington and their congressional areas and their states, trying to jockey for

these different primary days. then you have different primary runoff days, so it gets even more complicated. one of the strongest recommendations we make is try to take the redistricting process out of the hands of the political, elected political officials and have it done by a commission. iowa does this for example. and while it may not be perfect and those who might say this is a bad idea would point at that and say, that is not perfect, well there is no perfect solution -- >> give me opportunity to be here. first time i've been here in this capacity of the supreme allied commander europe and european command commander. i look forward to our conversation today. i really look forward to the question and answers afterwards. it's a pretty tight schedule. i'm only here for a short time today. i promise to mick this kind of thing available next time i'm in town as well. i have a short statement and we'll get to your questions. as you know it is a very momentous time in europe, probably the most since the end of the cold war especially because of the change, recent

changes wrought by russia. i'm very pleased with president obama's announcement of the european reassures initiative, one billion dollar pledge will help us sustain our persistent presence efforts in europe and assist us in protecting our own national security interests while also reassuring our allies and partners of the u.s. commitment to our article v. you come to work with the president, congress and department of defense to see this effort come to few is. it is too early to lay out what the details of what we will do but it will cover increased and enhanced training, readiness, exercises, and necessary facility improvements that we will need in order to conduct quality training and readiness activities with all of our allies and partners. these training efforts all in support of our nato allies and partners in europe now fall under the umbrella operation atlantic resolve. in this operation we will

continue to demonstrate our continued economistment to the collective security of nato and dedication to the enduring peace and stability in the region. in light of the russian intervention in ukraine specifically. operation atlantic resolve will continue to demonstrate the united states's solemn commitment to the collective defense of all nato allies. it has been true since we signed the washington treaty in 1949. we will respond if the security or territorial integrity of our allies is violated. we will also have built constructive security and defensive cooperation with ukraine and other members of nato's partnership for peace over the past two decades to help build a europe that is whole, free and at peace. our ability to respond quickly to reassure our european allies and partners was enabled by our forward station forces and the force structure we have in place now. i believe our force levels in europe are about right.

even absent the latest developments in ukraine. we should take a knee and make no permanent reductions to our existing force structure. in fact we may need to additional rotational forces to cover a sustained, persistent presence that we are now envisioning. there are other issues on the stove as well for ucom. we're supporting other combatant command through our forward presence in europe, africom and monitoring of unrest in north africa. centcom with force flee in and out of -- flow with monitoring situation on the ground in irrake and syria. transcom and socom and their missions as well. we are assisting opcw in ridding the world of syrian chemical weapons. a recent highlight in these efforts that the cape ray will arrive in the port tomorrow to transload syrian chemical weapons from the danish vessel.

and then transit to international waters to neutralize the chemical agents in a safe and environmentally soundmanner. concurrently we have also been engaging in ongoing operations with nato in defending our partner turkey. and our commitment to the defense of israel. make no mistake, our operational tempo is high but the spirit and morale of our forces is high as well. every airman, soldier, sailor and marine i've had the opportunity to meet is fully up on our mission and eager to do their job. every alliance and partner member i meet on the battlefield is also equally enthusiastic. we are a proud carriers of a legacy that gee ban just over 70 years ago on the shores of normandy. that legacy endowed us with the nato alliance and steadfast relationships with incredible allies and partners who fought alongside of us in almost every conflict. additionally by hosting our u.s.

forces forward they enable us to be more responsive and ready for issues in and around the continent. it is indeed a momentous time in europe but with the support of our partners and allies we will face these challenges like we have in the past, together. and build a safer, more secure europe. so thank you and i think, bob, the first question goes to you. >> thank you, general. a question for you on ukraine. i wonder your assessment of latest developments there including the temporary cease-fire. do you think the conflict has reached a turning point? >> bob, i think what i would do is allow the actions on the ground to speak for themselves. there are, there is good rhetoric. there are some good words about a cease-fire and peace but what we see is continued conflict, continued support of the conflict from the east side of the border and until we see those things turn around i think we need to watch with a wary eye. >> and russian troop levels, is it still have an estimate?

>> well, i think what you've been told we see about seven plus battalion task groups on the east side of that border. numerous small special operations forces. that's not a helpful development in what it brings to the problem. >> thank you. mac gordon, "new york times." i might follow up on the russian posture. when he was in nato last week secretary kerry a you ukrainian helicopter was shot down with a russian weapon and a number of aircraft are lost in ukraine. what is the latest information on russian supplies of arms to the separatists and do they include antiwear weapons? >> to your last specific question, yes, they do include that. what we see in training on the east side of the border is big equipment, tanks, apc's, anti-aircraft capability and now we see those capabilities being

used on the west side of the border. >> aircraft that were shot down recently you think were likely shot down with russian-supplied weapons to the separatists? >> i think we need to allow the facts to be sorted out before i report it. i would say now it's a very good likelihood but we haven't tied the string directly together yet >> -- briefly, in europe. you have the rise of the fighting in iraq in syria, you have both of those countrieses, al qaeda elements joining together and especially al qaeda in yemen, alling looking to bring westerners in or visa waiver countries and potentially send them back out. what are your concerns specifically, if you will, about al qaeda operatives moving through europe, potentially attacking u.s. or european interests and especially coming back through yemen to attack the

united states? >> so allow me to speak in a little bit broader terms rather than label just al qaeda fighters in europe. let's use the term foreign fighter flow into europe. that is a great concern to me and it's a great concern to your european partners. just recently we've seen returning strike a tough attack in belgium and then he was arrested in france. so what does this tell us? foreign fighters can return to these nations. they can effect an attack or, some sort of problem for that nation and then move quickly across borders into other nations. i think this worries all of the nations of your pop about the capable of these foreign fighters returning. so the flow from all of these areas, from yemen as you talk about, but i think, more importantly, to the europeans, the flow from western iraq and eastern syria into europe is a

very distinct problem and we are working to address that flow. >> can i very briefly follow-up just on the yemen point? that's a country where it's well understood and known that that al qaeda element has the ability to make bombs that can evade airport security and all of that. do you have new concerns about the development of those kinds of weapons and what it could, what it could mean about the vulnerability of airport security in europe and in the united states? >> i would not use the word new because this has been a concern for some time. we remain concerned about the capability much some of these elements to develop weapons that could be authoritied-- thwarted by security systems. >> tony from "bloomberg news." what is your assessment of russia's motivation for going into iraq at this point when there incursion in the ukraine? is it to help send a signal to

syria? what is your reed on this. >> tony, i think that is little out of my area of operation. >> you follow russia and russia's geopolitical motivations. >> right. so i think what i would say is that, our concern, right now, in nato and as the european commander is what is happening along the turkish border. this is an ally that if we have to we will defend. that has been stated very clearly. so we're concerned about all of the operations by all of the players on the south side of that border would cause anything to cross it or increase the flow of foreign fighters or anything of the things that can affect us in europe. >> your concern, even though you're ucom, that could ripple with turkey being an example. >> i'm concerned about the spinover into turkey and your

european partners. >> given the concerns that you have mentioned, and mainly in what is going on the turkish border, do you think nato could play a role in the near future stablizing what is going on in syria and iraq? as you may know, sir, the influence of extremist movement, mainly isis is growing with time. >> i think nato has been very clear there is no mission to to into syria for nato forces but what it has also made clear we will defend turkey. as you know right now in turkey we have three nations from nato there with patriot units as a part of defending our ally from the possibility of attack by thighs intermediate range missiles. so we have been very, very clear that as to defending our ally, that is a nato mission. as far as a nato mission on the other side of the border. >> in syria there has been no call for that among nato

nations. >> [inaudible] i want to ask your assessment of russia's strategic forces. specifically have you seen any money diverted away from them due that their operations in and around ukraine? >> i have no evidence of that. i see that nato has, or excuse me, russia has for some years now embarked on a fairly ambitious reinvestment program and all across their forces. to your specific question of diverse from -- diversion from strategic forces to what they're financing tactically i have no indication of that. >> general, michael hoffman with military.com. go back to earlier comment you made about rotation of forces. how large of an increase would you kind of look at for that? what types of forces would you be interested in from a ucom perspective? >> i think the most important first part of the answer, or the question that you didn't ask i will answer anyway. that is, i think that first and

foremost we should now pause and determine, should we continue with any of the program reductions that are in the plan for europe. . . but as far as force structure i do not think we can take anymo anymore. then, once that question is answered, we would have a better understanding of what we would need as far as rotational forces. as you know, we have forces all

over europe now, european command forces that are a part of our immediate response measures, ground forces and polenta and air forces in lithuania and the south, ships in the black sea marines in romania etc. etc.. and we will need to keep this presents up for some time into the future to be determined. right now we are tasked we are tested to the 31st of december this year. again based on what happens with our overall force structure we would need to then rotate forces and to be able to do these missions which are now required in this presence mission in europe. >> the ukraine, does that change your equation on what needs to necessarily stay in eucom as well as how do you present that? >> i think it's a great question. we have all often worried about what is the force that we should

plan for. for the last 12 to 14 years we have been looking at russia as a partner. we have been make in decisions about force structure basing investments etc. etc., looking to rush as a partner. now what we see is a very different situation. so i think it was illustrative to just take for example what happened on the ukrainian border just some weeks ago. 28 battalion task groups combined arms force there with the air and land forces integrated well. that gives us a good idea to think about what we might face in the future and gives us a baseline for that conversation about what should be our capacity and capability both inside and u.s. forces in europe. >> kai. i am with air force magazine. i am in the same vein wanted to know if you could tell us whether we can expect the esc to give the -- to be completed and

also how much more the air force can expect to be impacted. >> i wouldn't want to answer for ose until it's completed. i think it's relatively soon and i have seen some of the air plans results. as far as the changes for europe or as far as the air force is that what you're asking? i think the budget details have been released and we are looking at reductions of our f-15 force in europe. and i think that is as much of the detail as i want to go into in this forum. >> i'm with "the wall street journal." made overly some images of tanks recently going into ukraine and i wonder if you have an update on why you believe they are still operating there and if they accept any more tanks than

any other details you may have on specific russian supplies. >> so there has been a release of nato data on tanks. i believe other armored personnel carriers. we have not seen any of the air defense vehicles across the border yet that we have seen them training in the western part of russia etc.. so i think that there are several types and capabilities of heavy weaponry that are moving across the border. >> you believe they are moving across that border? >> i do absolutely. >> earlier this year there were a handful of -- where russian warplanes came too close for comfort and since those incidents have there have been any other kind of engagements like bad in that area and do those sorts of close calls, have you given any thought to changing the procedures are

possibly in case another incident like this happens? >> there have been at least two instances in the black sea very early on and one where ships maneuver close to our ships. there have been aircraft make king low passes on our ships. but what i would say is that while they are not good and they are not the kind of behavior we would like to see, none of them got outside the norms of this sort of thing that happens on the sea. there are other things that are happening. we had an instance with our baltic fleet recently where the baltic fleet declared a training zone, was firing at targets and russian ships became involved, got too close to the target and cause those things to be knocked off. we have had a couple of other aerial instances both on the

west coast and on the east coast. and the pacific command region of responsibility. so while i wouldn't characterize any of them as extremely outside of the norm, the frequency of them has certainly picked up. >> has a that frequency prompted any possible change on possible u.s. responses in case they occur again? >> we will continue to conduct ourselves in a professional manner in accordance with the way the u.s. navy has done unc. the u.s. air force has done it in the air and we use those venues to pass our concerns back and forth. nothing to the point where we have made changes to our operating procedures. >> general lou martinez with abc news. going back to the question about the -- what impact are using tactically from these vehicles on the western side of the border and when you talk about anti-air are you talking about manpads and how do you assess

that level of training? >> okay, so we haven't seen any huge drastic tactical impact of these vehicles. clearly in the situations where they have been used by the separatist forces, they have a what i would call a decided tactical impact right at that moment. but as far as an operational impacts to what's happening in the east, nothing to speak of yet. we don't know whether the first to shoot downs were manpads or vehicle borne missiles. again, i like to report when i have the facts so i will just tell you that we have untied that string completely together as to which was used in which situation. >> have you seen on the eastern side does that involve manpads? >> we are not seeing training of

manpads but we have seen vehicle train capability. >> you said that you feel like the force levels in eucom right now that you are relatively happy with that. i'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about how you think the other nato partners are viewing our response to the russian tension and what might be the value of do you see any value in the discussion of racing that current force level of eucom? >> so thank you for the question because i'm quite proud of the way european forces reacted. when we first decided to do these reassurance measures, i was passed as the nato commander to develop a series of reassurance measures in the north, in the center and in the south and in each location to do it air, maritime and land capability as applicable. it's hard to get maritime

presence in the middle of europe but in the north and the south we have built those capabilities. and as you saw, the u.s. was the first to respond. less than 24 hours, much less than 24 hours on the go-to show with our fighters and lithuania, ships into the black sea almost immediately and now you see ship, i covered -- should correct into the black sea and now you see ground forces in there to baltic nations and in the south. so the point is that i think what we have set out to do which was two things, reassure our allies and also set the example and encourage our nato allies to come alongside of us in those nations, that happen immediately and quickly. second, as you know, with the

exception of the ships that were under european control at the time, all of the forces on the ground and the year that have immediately responded into these nations come from the european command. later in october forces from the united states will begin to rotate in and be a part of this presence mission in europe but right now it was those forward-based european forces, eucom forces that were first to the situation. so i think that's one of the enduring reasons why we need to eventually have the right force structure so that we can respond at speed when required. >> you talk about some of the heavy equipment at the border in ukraine. what about russian special forces? it was quite evident that some of the separatist were really separatist or acting more like

special forces and russian operatives. >> i think you have heard me say before the following whitney which i believe remains today. russian and regular forces are very active along the border of ukraine. facilitating the movement of forces equipment and finances across that border. russian irregular forces are very active inside eastern ukraine. russian backed forces are active inside eastern ukraine and russian financing is very active inside eastern ukraine. >> thank you very much. >> thank you all.

>> i want to welcome back to the oval office president bastl let. she is my second favorite michelle. [laughter] and i very much am pleased to see her again. we had the opportunity to work together when i first came into office. since that time she has been extraordinarily busy doing excellent work at the united nations particularly around women, an issue that the united states have been very supportive of and we are very proud of the work that she did there. she is now back in office and it gives us an opportunity to just strengthen further the outstanding relationship between the united states and chile.

let me say first of all congratulations to chilean national football team for an outstanding show at the world cup. i know was a tough loss but it also showed incredible skill and talent of the chilean team against a very tough brazilian team on their home turf. so congratulations to them. coming up we have a tough match as well. i want to wish the u.s. team a lot of luck. the basis for chile's in the united states strong bilateral relationship includes the fact that we have a free trade agreement that has greatly expanded commerce in both countries. it has created jobs in both countries. we have excellent cooperation

when it comes to a wide range of issues, energy, education, people-to-people relations. chile has been a model of democracy in latin america. it has been able to consistently transition from centerleft governments to center-right governments but always respectful of democratic traditions. obviously those traditions were hard one at president bachelet knows as well as anybody how difficult it was to bring about democracy and now the fact that chile across the political spectrum respects and fights for the democratic process makes it great model for the entire hemisphere. today we are going to have an opportunity to discuss how to deepen those relationships even further. i know that education for example is an issue that is at

the top of president bachelet's agenda and something that is at the top of my agenda here in the united states and for us to be able to strengthen student exchanges and compare mechanisms and ideas for how we can build skills of young people in both countries is something we will spend some time on. we are both very interested in energy and how we can transition to a clean energy economy and we will be announcing some collaborations including the facilitation of the disruption of a major solar plant in southern chile that can help energy needs. we will talk about regional issues. obviously we have seen great progress and democratization throughout the region and in part because of chile's's leadership but they're awfully silly still some hotspots that we have to try to address as well as issues of security in areas like central america and

the caribbean and i will be very interested in hearing president bachelet's views and we will discuss international issues. chile with its seat on the u.n. security council can serve as a leader on a wide range of issues from peacekeeping to conflict resolution, two important issues like climate change and we have great confidence that in that role chile will continue to be a positive force around the world. so i just want to say thank you for not only the friendship with president bachelet but more broadly our friendship with the chilean people and president bachelet's predecessor he and i had an excellent relationship. she and i have had an excellent relationship.

i think that indicates it really goes beyond any particular par party. i am confident that my replacement after i am gone well have an excellent relationship because it's based on common values and a strong respect in both countries for the value of the u.s. chilean relationship so welcome and i look forward to an excellent conversation. >> thank you president obama. i want to first thank you for the invitation to visit with you and your country. of course we are looking forward to enhance our cooperation in different areas. as you just mentioned chile in the u.s. have had a very strong relation for so many years and we want to make it deeper and to enhance it in different areas of course. this look great -- be a great opportunity to discuss regional and international issues. also we will be able to have on

the bilateral dimension be able to increase our cooperation in areas that are very essential and for u.s. and chile such as you mentioned education energy science and technology and people-to-people relations. we already have as you know not only bilaterally but we also have california and chile massachusetts programs working very strongly and we continue and will continue on that path. this year we are commemorating 10 years of the free trade agreement from the u.s. and most important for investment. we also have the possibility to have activities with the chamber of commerce and others.

it's stronger and stronger every day so i'm very happy to be with you here again. i am sure this will be a great meeting. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you guys. thank you. >> at live at 4:00 p.m. eastern the chilean president will be at the brookings institution talking about south american democracy. >> booktv sat down with hillary clinton in little rock to it discussed her newest book hard choices. >> i learned while i learn before but certainly as secretary of state to expect the

unexpected. nobody expected the so-called arab spring until it was upon us. and we have to learn to be agile and ready for the unexpected. while we try to build the world that we want, especially for her children and now for my future grandchild, but we have got to be aware of the fact that all these other countries, all these billions of people, they are making hard choices every single day. we have to be ready for that because i'm absolutely convinced that we have to continue to lead the world into the kind of future that we want. we can't sit on the sidelines. we can't retreat. we are going to have setbacks. we are going to have disappointments but over time, our story has become the dominant story. it represents the hopes and aspirations of people everywhe everywhere. that is what i want americans to understand and the main reasons

why i wrote this book i know there's a big debate going on about our role in the world and we have some real unfortunate consequences still to deal with from prior decisions and the like. but we can't abdicate our responsibility. how we define it, how we executed well be the stuff for political debate but the world needs us. america matters to the world and guess the world matters to america for our prosperity and our security and our democracy. >> next to discussion the 2014 quadrennial homeland security review which outlines the department's priorities over the

next four years. alan cohn the assistant homeland security secretary for strategy, planning and analysis and risk talked about his department's priorities for the current review. following his remarks a panel gives their thoughts and analysis of the review. it's hosted by the center for strategic and international studies. >> all right, good morning everyone. i am kathleen hicks here at csis and international security program includes him and security program. security is just one and i am very pleased today to be able to introduce and then follow on in a conversation with assistant secretary alan cohn from the department of homeland security.

alan is relatively new expanded title of responsibilities as for strategy, planning analysis and risk so i'm not sure what's left out of there but there are other people at dhs ugly he is keeping other people employed beyond those areas. in addition to leading the qhsr does the last one and this one the first and the last one he is also critically important for what comes after the qshr and hopefully we will talk about that today in terms of linking strategy and the departments processes for executing strategy. alan then i have known each other for quite a long time. we where fellow travelers on quadrennial reviews and quadrennial defense review's in the past but also also we were together an interagency reform efforts both here at csis and the project on national security reform. alan is a member of the career executive senior executive service and has been since 2007

and of note he has also served plenty of volunteer time as a first responder. he responded to the 2005 hurricane season september 11, 2001 attacks and the 1993 world trade center attacks. so with that let me turn the mic over to alan and let him provide us an overview of the qshr and then we will have some conversation. thanks very much. [applause] >> thank you so much. i appreciate that and thank you all for coming today. it is a privilege to be here. we have worked together on many different issues and it's nice to be here to be able to talk to all of you in this environment and this forum about the review that we released. so what i wanted to do was take the opportunity today to talk to

all of you about the review itself. some of the findings and also how it fits into the larger initiative on unity of effort within the department of homeland security and secretary johnson initiated soon after he arrived at the department. so, for those who don't know what the quadrennial homeland security review review is at the mandated review that the department undertakes every four years and it really has two dual purposes. number one, it's to make recommendations regarding strategy, long-term priorities of the nation for homeland security so looking at it nationally across homeland security. second is to articulate guidance on the program's assets capabilities budget policies and authorities of the department of homeland security. the department of homeland security is one part of the

larger enterprise of federal and state, local territorial and tribal private sector, international, partners of all types as well as individuals, families and communities that all have a place in keeping the american homeland safe and secure. the first qshr we deliver to congress in early 2010, and that qshr that first qshr really answer the question what is homeland security. we established a series of key concepts, laid out a vision in the set of goals and objectives for homeland security. some of the key things that were articulated in that first review where that number one, homeland security has a forward-looking vision and mission and responsibility. it is not a question of sitting and waiting for the next bad thing to happen. it is ensuring a safe, secure

and resilient american homeland and doing that together partners and stakeholders of all types. following on that, homeland security is carried out through an enterprise. again, the department of homeland security issues one piece of the larger national puzzle, looking at responsibilities and authorities competencies and effective factions, a wide variety of organizations and individuals. third is homeland security is deeply-rooted in american history. think about homeland security. we think about the attacks of september 11 but the concept of homeland security is really about the intersection of traditional governmental and civic responsibilities with new and emerging threats and challenges. so we think about things like civil defense, customs, border responsibilities, law enforcement. these are things that go back in many instances decades if not all the way back to the founding

of our republic republic and they are the foundational elements of any nation's ability to keep its population safe and secure and resilient. we articulated in the first review and i want to talk a little bit more about how we furthered this in the second review that homeland security is essentially managing risks to the nation. and every secretary from secretary ridge to secretary chertoff to secretary napolitano and now secretary johnson have highlighted that we face a range of threats and hazards, that they pose different degrees of risk and that we need to look at managing that risk to a level that is acceptable to the nation. that is our charges as homeland security. the fifth domestic security is part of the overall national security.

this is something president obama articulated in his first national security strategy and it's been a theme ever since. and you see it echoed in both quadrennial reviews and the last thing to note from the first review was the articulation of a cybersecurity and national resilience including all hazards emergency management that is core homeland security missions. all of these foundational elements, all of these key concepts carry over to the second review and carry over to today's conception of homeland security. the purpose of the second quadrennial review therefore is different. it's not to repeat this exercise to build on these key principles and look deeper and more extensively at the challenges. we did three things in this review. first, we described describe changes in the overall security advising since the last review.

looking at the strategic environment and the trends future uncertainties and particular looking at it through the lens of risk strategic national level homeland security risk. the second is to update the goals and objectives of that underneath the five homeland security missions. those missions endure but of course changes over the last four years as well as changes we can anticipate in the future advised us to update and renew that the five vision framework. and then third district -- it takes the opportunity to articulate strategic shifts necessary in key specific areas to best address the changed security environment. and again, in doing that, the review reflects a more focused, more collaborative departmental strategy planning and effort and in that way takes an important

foundational step for the secretary's unity of effort initiatives. so just a word on that. secretary johnson saw very quickly that enhancing departmental unity of effort was going to be a key element of the success of our department and therefore a key element of his time as the leader of the department. in april as secretary johnson released a memo internally within the department on strengthening departmental unity of effort outlining his priorities on how the department will manage itself in a more effective way. the department will build upon the successes that we have had and the capabilities and competencies and the unique perspectives on each of our entities to build an organization that is truly greater than the sum of its parts. so that unity of effort and initiative really takes not only a more disciplined and focused

look at the development of policy and strategy, but also creates defined linkages and how we drive strategy and policy into an execution both on the investment side with respect to joint requirements, capabilities, programs and budgets, major investments but also on operations. how do we plan jointly for operations. how do we conduct our operations individually and jointly and also all the service effectiveness in the results for the american people. ..

resulting in the document hopefully all of you have had a chance to see, to download, to look through and we have fact sheets on the table as you exit the room. if you do summaries of the report itself and the key findings. let's talk for a minute about that examination of the strategic environment because this is one of the things that was a priority. how can we best assess the strategic environment for the

homeland securithomeland securid draw conclusions about drivers of change and strategically significant risk. we did a series of examinations of current and emerging risks and the trends and future uncertainties, system it relationships as well as threats and a current picture of risk. we synthesized back into a set of risk insight. it tempts us to think too much about what already happened and not enough about what may happen going forward. but to synthesize the current understanding of risk with our view of the trends and future uncertainties, systemic and causal relationships to understand what made the risk picture look like going forward. what might pose the most strategically significant risk this resulted in the examination

and articulation of the homeland security strategic environment that you see set forth in the report. there'there is also an important nesting of the quadrennial review, the five homeland security missions and the risk priorities in the overall national security priorities and imperatives of the u.s. government. so if you have read any of the national security strategy is going back through the administrations. security and resilience of the homeland the advancement of the values both here and abroad anda strong and secure international order. each of these interests is reflected in the activities and missions of homeland security and each of the mission responsibilities of homeland security ultimately works to advance each of those interests.

that leads to the homeland security missions that was first established in the quadrennial review over to this review granting terrorism and enhancing security is the cornerstone of homeland security, securing and managing the borders and forcing administering the immigration law and safeguarding and securing cyberspace and ensuring the national prepared us. these are end during missions debate commission to provide mio provide security but this recognizes that there needs to be a deeper look at strategic prioritization's within the missions. and we are asked from time to time what is the prioritization of the missions. but again the missions serve the national interest so how do we prioritize and create priorities within the missions?

and again the statements of every secretary going back to the first secretary of homeland security give us the direction on that. we need to look at the strategic national level risk to understand what those strategic priorities are. what are the challenges that face us as a nation in the mission responsibilities. what is the impact not only in the threats and hazards in the challenges themselves but the likelihood and the consequences with the directionality do the trends and future uncertainties suggest? this is my favorite slide. what we have tried to do.

into the side of the six key drivers and the threats come hazards and challenges that oppose the most strategically significant risk over the next four years. so what are those drivers of change and much of this won't be a surprise. you can observe many of these things in a strategic environment now. and you know there are emerging issues in each of these areas. that isn't the threats that we face today. the world is changing and the environment in which those that wish to do the united states and its interests at heart are changing so homeland security needs to adjusts to those changes but there are other drivers to change.

information communication technologies when 9/11 occurred there were no iphone's or ipad and no look at the interconnectivity and the speed of the transfer of information. they are nowhere near where they are today and the pervasiveness of information communications technology. and the advanced dramatically in between that review and this and as we look forward into the environment, we see more of the interconnectedness of machine to machine of the broad connectivity and automation and we see that change will continue to happen in that area in a rapid pace driving not only the

threat hazards and challenges but their likelihood and the consequences and vulnerabiliti vulnerabilities. natural disasters, pandemics and climate change. increasing not only the severity of the natural disasters, but the unpredictability of the consequences. as they caused a cascading impacts in the communities through the societies and infrastructure. if you look at the homeland security strategic risk environment of the pandemic stands out even among those other risks that we see, and we talked about that in a moment

and that fresh challenge and vulnerability in the strategic environment. interdependent aging critical infrastructure systems and networks. when 9/1 9/11 9/11 occurred we t the primary threats to the infrastructure was kinetic of individuals wishing to do it harm, to bring harm to infrastructure through the connecticut means. we now know the infrastructure is just as vulnerable to the weather, to cyber intrusion and to its own age and consequent folder abilities. supposed to be interdependent and at the age of the systems and networks provide questions and challenges for us going forward and they also provide opportunities as the infrastructure is updated and replaced. and it gives you an opportunity to build more resilience and security and more forward-looking and desist that we construct and think about our

infrastructure. the people of the goods transiting through the flows that come in and out of the united states and if you look at. it's going to continue to increase. we can keep up effectively with the flow just critical to our economic well-being. at the same time increased flow of people and goods in the lawful side. that is transnational criminal organizations and others seek to exploit. for the production of the dangerous or the legal goods and items. and then finally the budget to

drivers and the physical environment and the overall national fiscal environment puts pressure not only on the federal government of the state government, local government, it most parts of the private sector and many of our international partners they feel the pressure in the current fiscal environment. so how do we effectively ensure the security and resilience of our nation in that environment? so those key drivers for which we have represented and kind of what we call any city usa and some of the key trends and the key statistics that you see on the slide dr. us to a set of hazards and challenges. so what are those? first of the terrorist threat we

talked about is evolving and remained significant as a planning and operation become more decentralized. the united states and its interests particularly in the transportation sector remain persistent target. second, growing cyber threats are significantly increasing the risk to critical infrastructure and to the greater u.s. economy. third, by logical concerns as a whole including bioterrorism, but pandemics for animal diseases and other agricultural concerns that ended with a top homeland security risk because homeland security risk because of the potential likelihood and their potential impact. nuclear terrorism to the introduction and use of the improvised nuclear device while unlikely remains an enduring risk because of the potential consequence. transnational criminal organizations are increasing in strength and capability driving risk and counterfeit goods, human trafficking, illicit drugs

and other illegal flows of people and goods and finally, natural hazards are becoming more costly to address the variable consequences driven by the trends such as climate change and aging infrastructure. so i look at the environment and identified a set of key drivers and that allows us to discern the set of strategically significant risks over threats and hazards that oppose the most strategically significant risk over the next four years. some of the guiding principles that we articulate in this second review, first again the homeland security preventing terrorism. terrorism. homeland security must be multi-threat and all hazard. we talked about in the first review how all hazards of emergency management was a fundamental element of homeland security. in this review, we recognized

again what a reality that everybody operates in this environment knows that homeland security is multi-threat as well. second, somewhat apparent on its face to everyone who operates in this area, homeland security supports economic security to ensure safe and efficient movement of people and goods through lawful means across our borderallborders and the servicr economic well-being. homeland security and economic security are inextricably intertwined. a third, homeland security requires the network community in the first review we talk about the homeland security enterprise and this recognizes we must continually strive to network that enterprise together to share information, to share best practices, to build capacity so that we can all work together towards the common ends. fourth, homeland security relies

on the market-driven solutions and innovation. we must recognize the market nature of some of the threats and hazards and challenges that we face. and recognize the vast potential of the market solutions and partnerships across public and private sectors in addressing the threat hazards and challenges. fifth, and though it should need no emphasis, we do so here on the homeland security is uphold civil rights and liberties, thinking about the national interest that have been articulated in the success of national security strategies. homeland security activities serve all of those interests including our values here and abroad. and again, homeland security is national risk management and so this review is the effort to evaluate the strategic environment and articulate those threats, hazards and challenges that pose the most significant risk and articulate the strategies under new shifts and

re- emphasis of things already done to address those most strategically significant threat hazards and challenges. with apologies for the chart, this is again the mission framework for homeland security. the missions that we discussed into their elements and strengthening the homeland security enterprise. again, this review emphasizes the structure into the last four years and the changes that we foresee. so what did we look at in this review as a result? there were five studies linked to the findings in the strategic environment to the guidance and leadership and we recounted and agree emphasized the approaches

we are already taking to other pressing challenges and hazards across the homeland security environment within this review. so this review talks about how we will secure against the terrorism threat and how we will safeguard and secure cyberspace for the biological threats and hazards. recognizing the enduring nature of the risk. it means that the different types of threats and challenges that come to the country through the flow of people and goods were different. it's different than the profit motivated actions of transnational criminal organizations.

it is naturally occurring challenges that can come through the flows of goods and people entering and exiting the country. finally, the review examined and articulates the basic way of thinking about executing the mission through the public-private partnerships and building on all of the work that has been done not only over the last four years. but since the inception on public-private partnership in a number of different venues. based on the strategic environment, the mission responsibilities, the review also discusses and reemphasizes the approaches that we are taking to counter the nuclear terrorism using demand provides nuclear device. and the approaches to the national preparedness and the whole community approach.

what does it say about these things with respect to the terrorism threat and the nadir of the terrorism threat. ..

building again on the strategies and policies articulated by the president and by the department in this area. the approach to counterterrorism it is shifting and evolving approach to preventing terrorist attacks and including providing support international partners which will increase border management customs integrity and law enforcement capabilities and capacities and use information received in advance to screen dangerous goods and people abroad based on risk. waiting for -- rather than waiting for rival in the united states. these are concepts that have been substantiated in our approach to terrorism or the successive administrations. we reemphasize these areas and articulate new and evolving ways to use these types of approaches to counter the terrorist threat

as we see it today and as we see it evolving in the future. safeguarding and securing cyberspace. each and every day the united states faces a myriad of threats in cyberspace. from the theft of u.s. international property to cyberintrusions to the denial-of-service attacks against public web sites and attempted intrusions of u.s. critical infrastructure. to address these threats we have identified four strategic priorities. strengthen the security infrastructure by leveraging the work being done pursuant to executive orders 1336 on improving critical infrastructure and presidential policy directive 21 on critical infrastructure security and resilience each of which build on previous efforts u.s. government and national efforts to strengthen safeguard and secure cyberspace.

securing the federal civilian government information technology enterprise by helping federal civilian agencies manage cybernetworks networks advancing law enforcement incident response and reporting capabilities," nation with our partners across the law enforcement incident response and reporting community and strengthening the broader cyberecosystem by collaborating with communities domestically and abroad standardizing information-sharing practices and developing a skilled workforce. with respect to biological threats and hazards as we noted it and the strategic environment assessment, the assessment of strategically significant risk continues to point us towards biological threats and hazards. not just bioterrorism but emerging infectious disease or an animal disease agricultural concerns. as a top risk that we currently

face and a risk that is only growing over time. so how can we best built on the work that is being done to date, the lessons that have been learned and implemented from previous events, previous exercises? our approach is to stop incidents involving priority biological threats and hazards before they escalate to overwhelm state local and territorial driver -- tribal partners while ensuring those have the capacity to -. so what does that mean? prevent those biological incidents from occurring where possible proofers informed decision-making identical biological events. improve confidence to act not just within our department are not within the federal government but across the whole homeland security enterprise.

respond and recover effectively from biological incidents and maintain vital services and functions during and after biological incidents. maintain our hilochee continues to function not only as a society or infrastructure of critical services should enter the tie occurred. with respect to managing flows of people and goods, again the movement of people and goods around the world has expanded dramatically in recent years. as the volume of global trade and travel increases the potential for illegal transport of goods and people across our borders also increases. the department of homeland security and our partners continue to secure and manage flows of people and goods to ensure economic prosperity and minimize risk. based on an in-depth look at the