[laughter] >> what about right here? >> another venezuela question. to parts. how many quarters worth of debt service if prices stay in the '80s? the tickets to a crisis proportion will they cut more or domestic fuel subsidies? >> to assume they maintain those exports then to a cyclical adjustment they will have to devalue the next few months they can and service their debt in 2015 and 2016. but then it will get more

uncertain. with resources scaling back their influence to generate exports in general. so they will continue to be more aggressive with the cuban internal demand is 40,000 pearls they have been getting 100,000 using the rest. but we see them renegotiating terms with china. exporting around 330,000 barrels per day with china the import figures show that those numbers are down at 200,000 barrels and that is additional cash they have to work with. the government right now is very short term protest for the cash generating exports

is the goal but that domestic subsidy is architect the with the national assembly elections. but it will is $0.9 per gallon. they do generate $13 million per year. that this is a government that is terrified to do anything with political ramifications and that is potentially destabilizing. that is off the table for now as officials told me that. may be you will see a domestic fuel subsidy in 2017 maddow also expected to be gradual they're not just to eliminate outright. >> saudi arabia supports a generous welfare state of whale.

is that also threatened? and what about the lowering of the price? >> is somewhat controversial with one of saudi arabia's leading millionaires wrote an open letter to the oil minister a couple weeks ago saying this could be a catastrophe of the prices keep going down to urge the government to keep prices up

nonetheless it is clear there is a debate with the royal family if they should cut production to keep prices up. and i don't know how this will turn out to deal with the other opec members as they're willing to go along with production cuts. if not the saudis will maintain the production level that is considerably below 80.

>> why is that a disaster. >> but with the dissidents of the royal family? to come out publicly with the royal family so to meet it is those family members to have that reality mated a possible catastrophe for the nation's. >>. >> i have a question on the iran nuclear talks with the prices on the russian position. i would imagine getting to a

breakthrough in the medium term would have the increase of the exports which could have an impact on that oil prices. to the russians have a negative incentive with the impact on the old price to get to us deal on the iran nuclear talks? >> bet yes russia is very much aware of the consequences to have the same shan's reduced so not only russian sales of whale but the pipelines over the

last 20 years to make sure they avoided iran to get the products delivered to the international markets for the sanctions to be lifted on iraq said in the oil flows north to south than yes russia loses another it fantasia has an had the last 50 years with the distribution of boreal. -- of oil. and yes from a certain standpoint it is not want another player on the international market on a variety of levels. >>.

>> with the data they have a lot of oil over there so what effect do they have on coble demand in the future? >> with a number of african and countries to look at deposits to bring them to bargain at the prices they would have would be apprehensive. if the markets would be tied

so you would not get the major technological terms coming into the country with the impact going for many, many years after the contracts are assigned. the a good news is it should be a lot more judicious and they both got big signs to understand lou bears the risk? because it is a proportion of their risk up front. >> courier to the end of the event. so i have the question. defining the characteristic of the petro state petroleum

is the only game in town for many of them. other countries have other sectors to fall back on. what are the prospects that it sets in motion of fees that do we become less petro stayed driven? >> in nigeria with recently what emerges says finance and it is more than we anticipated that the problem with the fiscal perspective that tax deficit is always directed at the oriole sector. nigeria does not know how to garner revenue.

but in order to do that's to have more investments that supports the sector to make it happen. >> but i think going in either direction concentrating more of its economy on oil i don't think they will change the strategy actually they have been choking off other sectors. but because she is moving more aggressively in and there has been some key policy bottlenecks that slow investment. so i think the best will be increasing production but

they have never managed to do it. but they have been talking about that since the soviet union that the cyclical nature ships to the advantage with that domestic manufacturing those are the arguments. but yet you the gift the russian economy today nobody expects that will ocher. does not export it that much many found themselves in jail and the sanctions for foreign investment makes it difficult they don't have a diversified economy to take advantage of some of the things that are available. >> talk about setting arabia

there working christ hard to diversify the main reason is the internal consumption of whale limits. so they're going big time into solar panels and then de-stalinization plants. they're very conscious of this and they have the money to do it. >> i think that is not going to be there for very long time. the most important -- important initiatives over 1.4 billion people do not have access to electricity

and though world. with the economic initiatives to take advantage to have transmission lines to get them into development so what do we do about that? that is a general perspective but it has to be done soon to take advantage of this opportunity. >> that sums it up what we see the price of oil developed on consumption. thank you very much.

[applause] [inaudible conversations]

spent a good morning. i would like to welcome you to brookings and to move today's event which is part

of the international leaders serious. my speaker today is the director general of the international atomic energy agency. years ago when i spoke to groups or reporters i would simply use the initials iaea that i would remember to sound out the full name but today you do not have to do that iaea is practically a household word. buy it is the indispensable effort a dispensable player with international efforts for the nuclear proliferation and.

the safeguard system is highly sophisticated to provide assurance that nuclear programs are useful but that agency has been at the center of compliance controversy with north korea and iraq, libya and syria and now heavily involved in a iranian nuclear issue. the agency has monitored firebrands implementation of the november 2013 the so-called joint plan of

action. since december 2011 it has cooperation to resolve serious concerns that at least in the past that carry our research and procurement activities related to the development of nuclear weapons but so far iran has largely stonewalled the iaea investigation. but to the nuclear issue is the responsibility to the iaea to monitor the compliance. said the director general in 2009 is now serving the

second term of office before becoming director general with the japanese diplomatic service. the last post as a chinese diplomat was as the ambassador choose the iaea from 2005 through 2009 and as japan's representative he served as chairman of governors in the 2005 / 2006 period in that capacity accepted the nobel prize on behalf of the agency for its work and iraq. and during his tenure the director has done much to enhance the iaea reputation for professionalism professionalism, integrity and objective of a. his predecessor in my view

sometimes strayed into highly political matters providing personal advisor on policies member states although he has kept the agency focused on the original technical mandate with its area of special competence to be extraordinarily capable instrument of policy. and the emphasis on the technical mandate has increased the agency's credibility and that is the number one asset. but the director general has made some tough calls on

issues such as a serious nuclear reactor and the possible military dimensions of the iran nuclear program. the way he saw them as warranted to analyze the capable professional staff. it is predictable that governments that were identical twin dash identified by the agency has violated the obligations from the agency and director-general to accuse them of bias but that he will not be deterred or intimidated.

so that evidence of forever it invades. a staunch supporter of the agency's safeguards system and a staunch defender of that system with countries with not so hidden agendas. but not only focused on safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation they have boosted the agency's technical cooperation and program to ensure that members states, especially those from nuclear energy and the weight for pushing the tragedy in has been at the forefront of efforts to ensure the highest standards of safety throughout the world and a worldwide

terrorist threat continuing to grow with the increase of nuclear and idiological materials that agency has significantly expanded its role in the area of nuclear security. so the iaea agenda is critical and the challenges it faces are daunting. luckily we have him at the helm. saw mr. director general. [applause] >> good morning ladies and gentlemen,. i am very pleased to be here today.

this institution has a well-deserved reputation. for more than one century we make a contribution to public policy in the united states. of a distinguished veteran of arms control but i have been asked to talk about the challenges of the roles of their brain and nuclear program. so before i tell you what it is and will tell you what we

are not. it is not the international nuclear police force. iaea is an independent technical organization. but to verify the of these activities that we collect and analyze all the information this impartial objectives to the board of governors the statute states to the government's. the roll is designed to

ensure that other materials are not used in such a way for another purpose. in addition it requires them to commit themselves exclusively for peaceful purposes. these countries are required to have a comprehensive safeguard but i suspect they are correct.

the system from the 1990's however the discovery in iraq third 1991 and north korea nuclear program shows the prospect. we need tools to enable less -- as. so with those in 1997. the agency requires more tools than safeguard including access to information it is essential

for the iaea for all of the country's nuclear material remains exclusively from these activities. and now stands at 424. ladies and gentleman the safeguards to day is very different from 1957. read the technology and modern communications to access nuys and materials that would be more than 1957.

that makes the persuasion and easier now. and with the iaea safeguards from the past five years. so with the amount of nuclear material but the iaea resources are limited. and it continues to grow but we must constantly find a way to find more efficiently and those areas. we have important new instruments also making use of modern technology we have

dramatically improved our inadequate -- capabilities for those outside. the implementation and continues to evolve. this involves the state's nuclear activities as a whole. with a 4 percent funding. the to the level necessary. if you are interested i can come back to that later. but the important thing it was implemented strictly.

also with the assumption that it would be processed but to date there are concerns about that possibility. therefore we are becoming important to use the related areas that involves helping to ensure a terrorist and other criminals do not obtain other radioactive material that iaea now plays a role in nuclear security. the agenda in recent years with iran and north korea and syria. these are very different

cases that they have in common that they have fully failed to implement this makes it very difficult to watch. as far as our concerns beginning in august 2002 to build though large underground that was declared to the agency. subsequently they have been acknowledged. let me say at this point it is important that iaea should be impartial to rally

supply the same principles to all countries those that we conclude with the member states. those as resolutions of the united nations but to become late 2009 i felt the spending of the issues results to the problem. the february 2010 stated nuclear material was not being diverted for peaceful purposes but iran was not providing sufficient corporation -- cooperation

that all nuclear material was interactive. the to gratify those issues to the nuclear program. the next important question is the years that have been spent here painstakingly to analyze the information from that independent sources with that every share provided by iran with a member of the member states. i decided to present their report and i stated the

information assembled it was with the organizations involved the information indicated iran carried out activities of a nuclear explosive device the informational also indicated that there might still be going. and i would like to be very clear on this issue with misunderstandings we have not drawn conclusions from the information from the nuclear program.

to have to be gratifying that they engage in activities of this nature in other words, to have the case. the iaea them board of governors and united nations to talk about those issues in order to restore the confidence and the nature of the nuclear program. but at times but last year we started to see some.

and then there agreed to resolve to take a step-by-step approach. but in the summer of 2014 to focus on employment the measures the to the important measures it should have been implemented two months ago still have not yet. they proposed the next up but it has not done so. so it is not an endless process. but how far or how fast we can go?

to provide the assessment to the board of governors it is then up to the board to decide when it is the iaea of which we have the fall. china france germany russia and the united states have a joint plan of action with iran. with that aim to achieve mutually agreed comprehensive long-term solution so the nuclear

program would be exclusively peaceful. and also to be implemented that this. [applause] plus one negotiations are continuing. this is contrary to the resolution of the board of governors. implementation is essential for the agency to provide assurance of the undeclared nuclear material. the current status of affairs cahow -- affairs show that we cannot provide all the material in iran but

it has to show the issue but to implement the digital's. what we need now is concrete action on the part of iran to resolve all the issues. there was no international confidence of the nuclear program. but i repeat it is a never ending process. >> with three were to happen very soon. but the iaea? >> there is no pressure but we cannot do this on our own. but through that cooperation i will now be happy to take

your questions. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much for your presentation. i have a few questions to pose it to you i am sure the audience has some there would like to pose i know iran will be a big focus of attention so therefore i will start off talking about be agency. and i particularly want to raise a concern of the

growing political is asian of the board of governors about the agency's role i remember when i used to attend the general conferences and the governors' meetings per usually there was a consensus of board members with said divided membership so now it is almost the norm on a lot of issues with the differences but you mentioned the state level contract. this is a very innovative approach to safeguarding it will enhance the agency's role but to have heavy criticism i can name their russia argentina.

about the innovative approach to safeguard. can you talk about what i describe as the politicalization surrounding that agency? >> i firmly believe that iaea should stay that way. . .

>> as far as what we stick to as a principal, we can be very impartial and neutral and credible. it does not mean 100%, and so we need credible assurance. we can see the conflict of this with the countries that we have

to implement this system. and they should be as transparent as possible. in sticking to this, we can avoid this without political situations. it's true that lots of issues have been a part of this and if i compare the environment we are talking about this taking shape. and so not only in this area, but in nuclear securities and nuclear powers and nuclear technologies as well and elsewhere.

but we have difficulties and we are operating in a very high environment. i think other obvious ways are to make ourselves impartial and nonpolitical and have complete results. >> let me just press you a little bit, as you meet the tremendous challenges in front of you, it's going to have to be pretty aggressive and strong and there are those who think it would be challenging. the agency and a number of ways and we've reached the conclusion i think on a basis of evidence that your staff have compiled that the syrians very likely had a nuclear reactor. and that finding was challenged and was challenged to this day and there are those who really don't one you or your secretary

at to have a strong and independent voice. and i see this as a real problem for the future of non-percolation. are you concerned by the challenges that you have been receiving? [inaudible] >> there are three things, iran north korea and syria. with a key point on this issue and the main point on this issue is iran and syria. with syria we have had this visit twice raid we have collected our own information and we also had to a talk about this. and this includes the drawing of

the conclusion board by board or to conclude and provide a conclusion based upon the finding that we have on our own. and so i thought that if i can do it, it's better to do it. when it comes to syria, they do not agree to me into the agency and we did not have as much information as we wanted and still we already have sufficient information and zero conclusion and that is why we do not have to regret it with a refusing of the corporation on the best way. even if we have enough information on our own, we

should be able to do this. >> let me turn to iran. you mentioned a few moments ago how important the additional protocol is to providing confidence that a state is not engaged in undeclared activities inconsistent with its safeguards and obligations. the iranians have agreed with this and it is a comprehensive solution and they will adhere to with the additional agreement to it. but it seems to me that for many of the measures that will have to be monitored by your agency, it will be necessary to go well beyond the additional protocol. something that the iranians have expressed reluctance to do and

obviously we don't have an agreement and we don't know the provisions, but if you can speculate whether the agency is going to have to go well beyond the additional protocol, if you expect that you will be asked to do that and are you prepared to do that. >> we do not yet know the content of this solution. but we have sometimes understood this additional situation. and it is somewhat foreseeable that the implementation would be given not to us and we need to

see the content of the agreement as it was agreed and it's very important to be endorsed and adopted by the board of governors. and we are operating under the authority and control of the board of governors in the case of this, it was agreed and [inaudible] we have tried to implement the agreement. we have a special board of governors and they agree that the agency implements this and i feel that the member states continue to have funds and they

responded very positively. so we received a mandate to implement the measures agreed upon in this direction and we have given them the means to implement them and so now we are implementing a. in this case it would be a good difference where we consider that implementation to be agreed upon on a comprehensive solution when it comes to these possible military dimensions come i think it is clear from your remarks and what has been reported that so far at least iran has not provided much corroboration with your investigation. so what happens if they continue to stonewall in this regard? you don't get the qualifications that you need and what do you do in that circumstance, do you

simply report to the board that you haven't gotten the cooperation that you seek, or do you draw from conclusions as you did in this case on the basis of the information available to you. iran continues to argue that it is a so called evidence based upon fabricated material and falsified documents and so forth and so on. but i think on the basis of your analysis i think you call the information credible that indications of these associations are part of a military nuclear program. and so how do you make this information available to you way back to well, first regarding

this with military involvement, we have agreed since november november 2013 that all of the issues apart from this should be resolved and we understand that there are other unresolved issues that include those issues as well. and it was a step-by-step approach and we have agreed to take up many of these issues and we have received some kind of information from iran and we are now finalizing it.

and we started that ratification of these positions with them on and it is limited. and we would like to clarify the other issues in which we have agreed upon. so we are encouraging iran, coming up with other proposals to be taken. and we need to do everything to clarify this with the past and present. especially in the syrian case that is relevant. so i think i said in my statement that in the iranian

case can be very different. and each case is different. and when it comes to volume, the information can be different depending on how it is very different. so it's far from that issue of iran, i think that we have to continue that battle with iran. and we have to live with the basic communication of clarity, that it was in the health report in 2010 and i follow the same assessment in my report. in 2011, we talked about that report were we identified 12 areas. so it can be outside of where we

are now. so we have now the local person. the best way to get ahold of them is through internet. >> enqueue, when we open it up, when you had done this by yourself and asked about concise questions, please go ahead. [inaudible] >> if you do get or operation, is it important that they make public the history of iran's work on possible military dimensions of the we determine are not and it seems to be some reluctance on the part of the iranians to have a public accounting. we have heard some indications that they might be more willing

to be cooperative if they felt that their answer to the russians would remain confidential within the system and some people would say that that is why they have been less cooperative with you even though we continue to negotiate with this. i'm just wondering what your stance is regarding issues that you raised. [inaudible] >> and i find him, it is when we share information in this way. i did it in my corder lee reported with a possible military dimension and we included information in this,

and we have talked about the confidential reported and if it is agreed among the members of the is to make it public and that report of 2011 and all the quarterly reports of this great as well are made from the public and in the future, if i provide the possible military formation and the board of governors agree. [inaudible question] >> thank you. i'm from the atlantic council.com. visit surprise you that iran is not writing this information given that it is involved in very detailed negotiations with

this on a long-term agreement? and that a long-term agreement somehow be contingent on progress, or can that be something that is reserved over the course of the long-term agreement? >> 's we have talked with iran in order to clarify this and i have had the occasion to talk to hassan rouhani. and so he indicates that iran is ready to talk about the issues with a possible military dimension. so for now the progress is so limited and i sense that there is that intention with the

clarification of the issues. and then it's important between ron ongoing and now is not the best time and we may not be focusing in the future. i continue to hope that this issue would this will possibly be credited as soon as possible. and this is the intention for iran to accelerate the process and i repeat this is not an endless process based on the corporation and we can credit these issues within a reasonable

timeframe. >> let me just dumb jump in on this issue. there are issues that say that it's going to be very difficult to get iran to provide a full confession of these activities, especially those activities that were directly related to individual weapons program. and so it should be sufficient simply to have confidence that those activities are not continuing today and that we have monitoring measures in place that would enable a ability to determine this in the future. so what do you think about that approach? >> we have talked about a reasonable timeframe and a reasonable timeline and we have talked about doing some of this

and we have had these areas. one step is normally for three months and how long does it take? in one step it is easy. and it will not be one month, it will be a timeline. >> yes, bad is how it is necessary to get iran to confess the activities and providing incriminating information that these activities were directed and it is sufficient to have

confidence of those activities have stopped and that we have monitoring measures sufficient to know whether they were resumed. in fact, do we need to really get clarity to what they are doing in the past? and we also expect iran to be as transparent as possible. and they can have and we like have access to people they have

been doing a good job the next step would be to report this and that includes making a decision by the member states. and we have talked about this. >> thank you. how important for the future to make sure that this is a peaceful program.

and i believe that you mentioned that we need to look at the company as a whole. >> i think that can give you an example of this. in the case of this, if we have a good reason to believe we have this military side and we can request access. and the country can refuse the deficit and we also have access

to this and we do not want to compromise in the way. >> this is a perfect thing of a money factor. it is already existing in this way. and so it is a probability in this region and the need to give this up. >> thank you very much. sir, i would like to be asking what you think in terms between non-percolation on the one hand and nuclear safety on the other,

because recently a number of those in the persian gulf region have been talking about the scary prospect of an earthquake or some kind of a nuclear meltdown which is not really an active nuclear proliferation per se, but it is equally dangerous to the flexibility of that region and i'm wondering if in your work are also focusing on that side of this debate. so i think you. >> yes, we do. we have worked with many countries in particular neighboring countries that have interest in the safety of this. we have a mission with iran and we have given a recommendation. and that helps on the highest

level of safety and in this case it was also raised and we are ready to review that aspect. so when sharing of the safety and security at this point for each country and the role of this is to have assistance on request. if we have a with west and a review for this, we have to prepare this. >> okay, thank you. >> what do you think he would do it tomorrow they declared an atomic bomb? thank you.

>> it's too difficult a question for me to answer. [inaudible] >> hello, [inaudible] yesterday you talked about secretary of state john kerry. this is such a comprehensive idea and generally do you think that we are able to do that? >> we are very happy to exchange views on the matters of common

interest. >> hello, i would like to ask about the so-called religious studies. have both sides been a part of this and my second question is what is the reason behind not making this document fully available? thank you. >> we have shared some of these documents between iran and the group with this approach. this includes the name of the administration in which we are engaged and the board of

governors in november 2011. and we have discussed this with the legalities from whom we have shared information and in that did not come to an agreement. and there was that progress in many areas and in this area and nothing is agreed. and we had discussed the issue of sharing documents, but there was no agreement and there was nothing in regards to the handling of documents and i

think that we recommend when we can see that whenever necessary. [inaudible] >> when it comes to the city, it was a greater frequency discussed and it was not often discussed of this to the agency. and we are asking questions and we have elaborated a western. we have given the questions in writing and we have explained the background of the questions. and so i think that we understand the question well.

and so the issue is to clarify this with the documents. [inaudible] >> i have the same question. and i think i would like to know your opinion we would be the government would be held accountable for this group of individuals in this includes

responsibility of each government. and this includes the database and this includes the information that is very useful to them and they are establishing their response. we asked to illicit trafficking

to use and project and then also some of them over this can be very effective. there are some that are more complicated to have precise information and i should be talking about this. and we need guidance to establish this. we have many issues with many recommendations in regards to nuclear safety. and this includes preventing the trafficking with the

responsibility of each state to reach some roles to play for the international organizations and iada is concerned with the nuclear security. >> thank you. >> i am a lawyer that focuses on the international export trae and protocols. let me turn you from this is a disarmament puller. and what has the agency learned in the last decade or so with respect to the investigations in iran that would help lead to verify a general treaty on nuclear disarmament and perhaps express this as the current

resources come out what level of resources would it take the agency to verify such a general treaty on nuclear disarmament. thank you. >> the iaea has some expectations and if requested, we already had to make this available to implement the agreed nuclear disarmament treaties. and in other words we do not replace this disarmament and we do not have this committee of the united nations either. it belongs to other areas or other countries and once the agreement has been reached and

when we have been asked for this by using expertise in this, we will consider this assistance. >> yes, sir, go ahead. [inaudible] >> mr. director general. you referenced your august trip to to ron. and i'm wondering if in your discussions with iranian officials, did you get the sense that civilian leadership would perhaps like to be more forthcoming in helping to clarify these issues and the islamic revolutionary corps that stands in the way? >> i cannot generalize what i

had from the iranian leaders and [inaudible] they would like to accelerate the process and they are learning to cooperate with the iaea. and i think that there is some political will and i have to clarify this on the issue. and it is enough to make the progress of the aspects and we continue to talk about this with iranian counterparts to clarify about the issues.

>> hello, what do you think is the biggest challenge in achieving a nuclear weapon free zone in the middle east? >> boundaries are very important. i joined the iaea in 2005 and this includes the resolution of a general concern in 2001 to learn from the experience of of and other nuclear free zones. >> it looks easy but it is not that easy. before we could finally convene in that forum, the iaea hosted

the form in 2011 with the states and despite the complexity of the issue and difference of views, we could have a very conservative discussion. and so i believe that that can relate and continue that dialogue and it is in support of the establishment of a nuclear weapon free zone in the middle east and it is not an easy issue as we have people following this issue. >> let me come back to the question of the agency investigation of the possible military dimension that the nuclear program ron has talked about. you mentioned access to individuals access to location.

and, you know, we know individuals that we believed were engaged in some of these activities. we know the locations where some of these activities took place. how would you assess the relative importance of gaining access to the sites order to individuals and how successful has the agency been? obviously the access to the facility, there were two occurrences in regard to this particular concern and it has been rebuffed constantly in recent years. but what about access to individual. >> it would seem that one of the most effective ways of keeping tabs on this is to have

continuing access to individuals and not a one-time interview where the subject of the interview might be leaving you tell the truth and so forth, but continuing and following on the access to gain some confidence that people who have the greatest expertise in some of the military related aspects, energy are working on civilian programs. how do you value a the relative importance of these different forms of access? >> the iaea is using access to fight people and information on the issues with that. but these are very difficult issues and for example we have

requested access from a very early stage and then access has been on part of people and very sensitive from this issue and because of their experience in the recent years. and we keep them at the site with people who have information about this. >> hello, mr. director general, i would like to ask is you have had the chance to work with two different heads at the energy agency and i would like to talk

about this under the current hassan rouhani administration. can you touch on this if your relationship with both men? >> we have very different types of people. and the process is different, but it was very important for us to have dialogue with both of them. and that includes both of them have a good understanding of the issue and can benefit from the dialogue. [inaudible] >> hello, i have a russian about what are the measures that the iaea was taking in regards to

this material, and what do you think is the role of this issue. >> i don't quite understand. >> okay, my question is what are some of them measures that the iaea can take to prevent the misappropriate use of the materials and what do you envision is the role in this issue? >> we are not in charge of this. in regards to the materialist and what can be diverted and our function is to prevent the virgins of materials and

equipment and peaceful use and it doesn't make a difference but there our basic functions in regards to the divergence of this equipment and safety. ..

>> >> to block the legal debates of the neocon proposition with field commanders say with the ability to go to war.

>> of a bite to commend c-span2 for the military. it was the best information of the interaction the nuances. continue -- if you continue to rise. >> c-span is one of the best programs i watch him more than once a week.

>> afternoon thank you for coming. i and chairmen of discerning hq we have six of the most important conservative leaders settle head a major conservative organizations and they're in the forefront of the effort by conservatives around conservative issues such as no amnesty national-security with the culture of corruption.

then we will open for questions. this was the rejection by the voters of the chamber of commerce ever republican candidate ran with a born-again conservative. in opposition to the big government policies with asiatic conservative alternative to the big beverage policies the voters reward them with the big victory as they did when granite -- traded ran for president with his contract could the america and the great teapartier victory of 2010. sold to compromise those democrats but then also a 2006 cover of 2008, 2012.

to obstruct and oppose to ignore the constitution and fundamentally change america. no american ran on a platform of compromise. many military leaders made a huge mistake to fight the issues of this campaign. of class warfare in racial divide. such does no amnesty and protect our border and the national security. less government intrusion in regulation with the xl pipeline and lower taxes, etc., etc.. had read the elderly in 2016? constitutional conservatives

they're not part of the washington government. based on comments by some republican leaders since the polls closed they may be backtracking. but the bible tells us a house divided cannot stand the the republican party is still very much a house divided. will now hear former ambassador to the united nations. >> thank you richard. standing before you today represent organizations that are in touch with the grassroots of america. to watch this election become naturalized to become

mobilized and energized that turned out to give republicans a clear majority in the senate and an overwhelming majority in the house. to stop amnesty and other forms but let me be clear we watched over the course of this campaign soccer mom speed transformed and national security is a primary issue for this new republican majority. one of the things is the expectation of the defense budget with the current and future threats to our

country with said she had is some with the non state actors and sovereign states. what we didn't hear from the voters is sending a new republican majority to ask achalasia minor the political party there the majority party in this country across the legislatures and governors in our midst. at the end of the day they did nason republicans the new republican majority to be competent managers of big government of expanding economy to make sure they generated revenue to take

care of the federal government first responsibility to keep their families safe. >> next we have the president of citizens united >> that will be very brief. it was a wonderful evening last night because conservative ideals won the night. a rally. barack obama and harry reid had been a national embarrassment for the last six years for a failed leadership, failed policy agendas and a disaster called obamacare. let's face it in september and october when they tried to get the first amendment of the united states instead of trying to create jobs or fix the economy they know

their priorities are in the wrong place. they are proud of the impact that they had from last may's elections. a robust conversation which is what of level playing fields allowed to create opportunity for the american people to get information to make good decisions. we need to focus on doing the things that is repealing obamacare and stopping amnesty and cutting spending to increasing the size and scope of government. last night i heard one of the republican leaders on tv say i know if we can repeal

obamacare because first and foremost, we need to fix the economy. the p.o. obamacare is -- repealing obamacare is fixing the economy small businesses cannot hire and big with the sheer cost of obamacare citizens united are going up by 45 and a half percent this month. that is an increase that is affecting every business in america if we can fix that we can create jobs and an atmosphere of growth and opportunity. i'm excited about what went on last evening to make sure the republicans here with these conservative leaders are talking about it is those promises that we've made last night that they

have to live up to. to make sure we help them along with that process. thank you very much. >> next year from founder and president for america. >> thinks whorehouse putting lids on. the g.o.p. won because every single kennedy ran as a conservative and that conservative base with the policies that they are destroying the nation cannot intros. voters spoke loud and clear for big government it is very important to stress not one candidate ran as a moderate. not one. the voters who voted for these candidates will my stand for business as usual from republicans to pretend as a conservative and govern

as a moderate it is dishonest for republicans they successfully campaigned on a promise for obamacare every member house and senate publicly supported repeal it is a unanimous promise to be again says it is time to do it the republican party ran over 35,000 television ads on obamacare alone in the month of october alone and spent hundreds of millions of dollars overall it is a moral obligation they have to fight past legislation to repeal obamacare. of pledge but the first act of the new majority in congress must be to keep its promise and they promise to repeal as fast as the doors

swing open. challenge the president to veto this legislation and take it to the american people to have a debate americans will win the presidency. they need to do join senator in fact, ernst anything less is the trail and conservatives will not forget they cannot forget winning the white house in 2016 if this is the case pledges must be honored. of the g.o.p. must reject the professional consultants to stop govern as big government republicans this is a prescription for policy failure. last night was a referendum and the voters said even after inclusion last night's results were not all that surprising.

when the g.o.p. runs against government it wins elections. history bears this out 201419941988 as moderates and in 2012 they lost every single time that is a warning sign to the g.o.p. presidential candidates no more moderates if you want to keep the majority keep the promises. get to work tomorrow. celebrate today. you earned it. >> nice to hear from the president of the susan b. anthony list. >> the bottom has fallen out of the abortion clinic.

why is that? that women don't agree as the great liberator for women that did not hold that is why we will then see again an election fought on democrat terms were abortion is that the center all americans are tired of politics of division that come from that the the to guard. consider this those that chose to remain silent on this election netted seven heard of all the republicans that used to do that. why? because the best campaign

consultants told them to button it up he would be at a sink with your constituents because they all limited abortion as a fundamental right. clarity on abortion was the enemy for them but we have always said if we have seen hiding from this issue is impossible our candidates stood strong and firm called they were resoundingly defeated today i heard more than 200 women speak out in louisiana and going door-to-door hoping they will carry on their jobs. mary andrew hurt the thames to gain while boating pro-abortion all along sale lot and they helped her in her downward slope we believe the ground game will help her.

and mark udall in colorado and running on a platform of major proportion it was too late to put that back in the box. especially with hispanics. in colorado even march udall was called marc uterus for his over the top focus on abortion and women's reproductive capacity. meanwhile the candidates stood firm that joni ernst a pro-life mother military veteran and longtime public servant would not back down from her record even in the face of attacks. when asked to clarify bruce brady directly lied to state moderators or his position on major proportion and that

is one way to handle lead. another way to literally run away. that is exactly what grade did when he was running against senator pat roberts and from a voter who try to ascertain his position on a term abortion. and responded positively to the pro-life candidate so to have those radical positions the unprecedented ground game more than 7,000 pro-life activists more than half of those door-to-door human to human woman to

woman interaction about what matters and what didn't. they communicated late payer tax funded abortion. now when it comes to women's politics it is reflective of the women of america not the how are you beat have men and children as obstacles but to take that commitment to take the bill up to make sure there is a vote early on you will take them up on that of her we will not forget it. to attack joni ernst last week to say it is not enough to be a woman you have to be committed to expand the rights and opportunities for all women.

with the incredible war hero and mother because of the straight jacket style of feminism they must complete a test before you to be considered a woman by a small group of women who have been running women's politics for. just like season be anthony -- susan b. anthony cast a vote and said you cannot build rights on the broken rights of other human beings and went on with frederick douglass together tuesday we rise and fall together and to burn women's conscience and think goodness they are returning women's politics to her model of what women

and politics ought to be. thank you. >> next we will hear from the co-founder and president of the tea party patriots. spee select could they presume the leaders to be mitch mcconnell in this and that i have two words:this. to your promises repeal obamacare use reconciliation to repeal a bill to put on the president's desk let him veto to draw a line in the sand. secure the border and block the president's plan for executives amnesty to maintain the rule of law if we had been for more than two centuries a nation of

law not of men. last night in the midst of what should have been a celebration i have reason for concern because the speaker bayer's office. to lay out an agenda of the 114th congress looking for a job legislation and tax reform legislation and spending reform legislation and legal reform legislation and regulatory reform legislation and education reform legislation. obamacare is mentioned know where. neither is securing the borders to prevent the executive amnesty provided to you having trouble from new hampshire to oregon from the brass bet to texas from florida to iowa in the last six months and the

battleground season in the district's there are two issues that motivated the grass-roots activists that propelled to victory obamacare to secure the border to block amnesty. one of two things is true. either obamacare and illegal immigration were left out of the press release deliberately or by mistake if it was the mistake the speaker needs to make that clear immediately by issuing a revised release on the agenda for the next congress that talks about these important issues but on the other hand, if it was done deliberately then clearly we have a problem. the two issues that motivated those activists to get neighbors and friends should be the two issues the

republican congress addresses immediately the time is now. the american people have spoken they have rejected these policies recall and congress to act in a manner deserving of their majority live up to your promises and earned this. >> next president from the family research council. >> first of a bike do congratulate the candidates those who won last night also those who were handier media are system marks because people are willing to make themselves candidates to get into this arena and it takes the hits and the shots and were card

and raise the idea is that is what makes the system work so i congratulate all of those were candidates last night also to those who won. congratulate their republic and a the rnc and reince priebus and the work they have done to evade that infrastructure. i think they covered a lot of ground to close that gap and it needs to be commended for that. will we will see is the most pro-life congress since roe v wade with almost every senator being stronger. this is significant the searching for a new battle plan as the fictitious war on women failed to serve as

a decoy to attract attention away from the failed policies of barack obama and how much he was not on the ballot yesterday by his policies were the american people of chosen to send a message by republican express to washington that americans have had enough of the president's failed policies to endanger our national security threat and our families and trample upon religious freedoms and enough is enough. now to take and keeps a congressional majority to pave the way for the g.o.p. to the white house in 2016 requires this majority to hire them to babysit they have elected republicans to run to the damage done by

this president to return america to a position of strength domestically and internationally. we stand ready to work with that new majority to accomplish these goals to make america an exceptional nation once again. time is not on our side the policies of the president have to be hurt our great nation. we must immediately begin rebuilding domestically and on foreign policy front. >> we will take questions please identify yourself please identify you want to answer the questions.

>> but presumably to support mitch mcconnell? >> with if you have been around the bases in the times that decision is not made by the respective powers. and we in fact, really do plan to articulate the agenda to establish the expectations of what we expect to get done. that is our goal that is our objective and then to incite to the majority in the senate and in the house to pick their evaders -- leaders