>> i'll be happy to get you that information. >> that mulls be hard to say every time. when i know you understand this. it must be that difficult. who did participate and will you provide those names? >> i have told you i'll get you that information. >> there is anyone outside that we need to ask? omb, treasury, white house, anyone who would determine not to ask for appropriations for this program in fiscal year 2015? >> once again i will go back and try to get you the information -- >> you have no idea when these mideastings took place. ...

of the law, but i did not provide any official scoring >> well, you have stated the aca was written in a tortured way so that the cbo would not score it as a tax. how did the administration use your information to write the aca in a tortured way so that cbo would not score it as a tax? >> once again, i apologize for my inopportune and inappropriate terminology. >> they did not score it as a tax, right? how did you do it?

how did you get cbo to not score it has attacks knowing that at some.you might have to get to a supreme court to say it was? how did you do it? >> i don't run cbo, i did not draft the legislation. >> what does cbo stand for? >> congressional budget office. >> what is scoring? quest a message to five the method by which the congressional budget office estimates the effect of legislation on the federal budget. >> you have said that you wrote part of obama care yourself. what parts did you right? >> if i said that it was once again an effort to see more important than i was. >> why would you say you wrote part of obama care yourself, and you are the

numbers guy, they used your modeling and knew they might have to convince the supreme court that it was a tax and convince the congressional budget office for scoring purposes that it was not a tax? how did you do that? >> ma'am, once again, i did not did not write any part of the affordable care act. >> explicitly said you wrote part of obama care yourself. >> i was speaking glibly. >> how many non- politicians know what cbo is? how many non- politicians know what scoring is? how many non- politicians would know that you have to get by cbo scoring in order to get the affordable care act to say that it is going to lower cost? you are a politician. everything that has led up to your testimony today is

an consistent with your testimony today, which is to say, all of your prior statements were a lie. is that true? were all of your prior statements are like? or or were they just glib? i want to change subjects about something that you began to discuss. is there a decline? is that what has yielded smaller increases? >> i don't have an answer to that. we would have to wait for someone. it is too early to know. >> is there a way a way to analyze the information to get that? to determine it? >> i think if you look at the medicare trustees

report, the national health expenditure it we will show you trends. >> okay. i am hopeful to get those trends. i am i am on obama care. my husband was on obama care with me. we were told that we were enrolled. when we filed claims we were told we were not enrolled. then we got it straightened out. he filed claims. we we were told once again we were not on obama care. well,. well, come to find out my husband was having chest pains at the time that he was told we were not enrolled in obama care, and come to find out he did not have all of the tests that he was advised by his physician to have. so come on october 24 the week before elections my husband went to sleep and never woke up he had he had a massive heart attack in sleep at age

65. a perfectly, by all appearances healthy man. come to find out in a a conversation with his physician after he died he chose not to have one of the tests, tests, the last test his dr. told him to have. this happens to coincide with the time that we were told that we were not covered by obama care. i i am not telling you that my husband died because of obama care. the dr. because he had a massive heart attack in his sleep. during during the course of time that he was having tests by a physician and was told we were not covered by obama care that he then decided not to have the last test the dr. asked and half. let me suggest that their may be a decline in participation and that it may not be to the benefit of the american people.

i want to suggest that regardless of what happened to me personally that their have been so many in the passage and implementation of obama care that have real-life consequences on people's lives and the so-called glibness that has been referenced today has direct consequences for real people. so get over your damn glibness. first first of all, i'm sorry. >> i think the gentle lady. do you have a pending question? >> i really do yield back. >> we go to tennessee. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to talk to you a little bit and my time about

your understanding of the state and federal exchange premiums that we talked about today. let me first just make sure i understood your comments. you have been here today. you don't like the way you said things. she asked she asked if the statements were a lie and you just said that they were not. >> they were glib and thoughtless. >> but in terms of content, you weren't lying. you don't like don't like the way you said it, but what you said you have some basis for. >> the comments that i made i made were just my conjecturing. some i have expertise. >> you did that an awful lot i don't think you are necessarily out of your area of expertise, but most of what you said politically maybe you were being a good politician, but i for one

applaud you for coming forward with the statements and telling people, this was a difficult lot of pass, wasn't it? you were up your advising people. it was it was a difficult sell, wasn't it? >> it was a very challenging political -- >> one because the american people were afraid of a government takeover of healthcare. they did not want socialized medicine. some people did want that. >> i i believe some americans do support a single-payer system. >> but that was tough for a lot of people appear. opposed to the healthcare law. that is why there was not a single republican vote there were all kinds of deals. i want to get to your understanding of exchanges.

state run exchanges are a lot more palatable. that is what was pushed and what was written into law, the state would set up exchanges and offer premiums >> i i don't have the exact wording, but i believe the law said that the state should set up exchanges. >> okay. you realize the federal backstop was always in place it's. >> that is the way the law was written. >> your citizens don't get there tax credit. >> once again, that was my trying to be glib and summarize. >> why were you being glib? you were concerned about the federal exchanges. why? >> i was asked -- i was

concerned about the federal exchanges because it was complicated and we were not sure who would be president. >> okay. it was a tough sell, once again. people did not want it. there was a lot of smoke and mirrors. you said that in one of your glib statements even though it was very accurate. in your opening statement, the.you were trying to make was whether -- for whatever reason they might not set up a federal exchange. you just said they had to set up a federal exchange. you just testified to that. >> the law said there should be federal backstop. >> but it did not say the federal exchange would subsidize people which is why you made the comment 2012, correct? >> a very clear reading of the law that tax credits should be available in all states. >> it is not clear. that is

why there is us up in court case. it is not clear at all, but you knew in january 2012 of 2012 that there was a concern. the president knew there was a concern. he thought they would fall in line. only 16 did. that is why you are concerned, correct? >> my comments were my effort to try to seem like i knew more. >> you belittle yourself. you are the guy they turned to to do this. you ran the model. you you had all these models for state and federal exchanges. did you not have a model for the event that is happening now? >> i am i am an expert with an economics and micro simulation modeling. i assumed tax credits would be available in all states. >> you knew that, but they did not write it into law. law. who did? it was not congress. four months after you made your comments the irs did an

end around and rewrote the rule to say federal exchanges had to offer subsidies which is why you are concerned in january. they came through and tried to change it because they knew that we would not change it for them. >> is there a question? >> you can comment on that. am i wrong? >> i can't conjecture why the irs -- >> you conjectured in 2012. you ran models. apparently the legislature did not listen to those models. they tried to pass this bill. they did not have language saying the federal exchange would subsidize the people. >> as i said, i think a clear reading of the law makes it clear that tax subsidies should be available to all states. >> again, that is why we are in the supreme court because it was not clear. ms. tavenner, you are the numbers person. >> 6.7 million people as of

october 15 had pay their premiums. >> i'm hoping you know this command you may or may not have it with you, how many of these people who signed up a federal workers? >> federal workers? >> people already on already on federal healthcare and then switched over to obama care. >> well, i don't no that number. i would assume the only individuals would be the members of congress. >> to to four million. how many of those signed up for obama care? >> i don't know. i would be glad to -- >> 6.7, how many of those are federal workers that shifted over? >> those numbers may be available. i will see if i can get you that. >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. we now now go to the gentleman from south carolina.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for allowing me to speak today. this has been a truly fascinating hearing. when you spoke i watched with great interest. you said that the administration lack of transparency in getting the affordable care act passed, but i think it is more and more clear that the affordable care act was passed on a lie a line with the foundation of deception that continues here today. going back to what was just being asked about, your assessment in 2012 at the state set up an exchange that it citizens would pay the tax and benefit citizens in other states. >> what i said was that if a

federal a federal exchange was not established and only in that circumstance -- >> you did not say that. you are saying that today. what you said in january 2012 was that if the states would pay the tax but not get the benefit that that would be a sufficient economic incentive for them to set up the exchange. that is what you said. >> as i said, i was conjecturing in areas beyond my expertise, trying to seem smarter than i was. >> do you mean lie? >> no, i mean conjecture. >> you were telling the truth back then? >> i was conjecturing. >> you also said in 2012 that the taxes under the affordable care act were on

insurance companies, not individuals knowing full well that the insurance companies would pass them on down. that was disguised tax. you still believe that? >> i do believe if you levy a tax on insured it we will be largely passed forward through premiums to there insurers. >> it was a way of hiding the tax. do you still believe that? >> once again, again, that was me conjecturing. what i believe is what i i just stated. >> he also said if the people had no, and recognize that we were shifting cost from healthy people to unhealthy people the law would not have passed. do you still believe that? >> once again, that was my

trying to pretend i have something i am not college was a political expert. >> ally then or alive today? >> a conjecture. >> all right. you said that the affordable care act was written in a tortured way to avoid the mandates being scored by cbo is a tax because you knew if it was scored as a tax attacks it would not pass. do you still believe that? >> once again, that was my trying to act like i was a political expert that i am not. >> what you are saying is you were lying? >> i was conjecturing in an area which i shouldn't have. >> you were not lying. you still believe that. all right. do you believe, you still believe that this deception was necessary to get the law passed? >> the statements to which we have been referring to day work, once again, conjectured by me in an area which i am not an expert.

>> you served as an advisor to cbo from 2008 and so when? >> i don't recall exactly. exactly. i believe someone said i joined the advisory council in 2,007. i went to a few meetings, and they ended, the last one was the end of 2,008 or early 2,009. >> at that time the law was being drafted, wasn't it? >> no. >> okay. you're not sure. >> i am not sure when i got i got off for the last meeting i was at. >> for someone who is detail oriented, that is pretty important. you are being paid to advise on tortured language, isn't

that kind of a conflict of interest? >> i am pretty sure that i did not attend any meetings to five. >> were you on the panel or warn you? >> i don't no the official data which they took me off the panel. >> not very detail oriented for someone who is supposed to be detail oriented. do you believe the administration's lack of transparency was used to its advantage in passing the affordable care act, act, as you said in 2012? >> what i said in 2012 was trying to speak about an area which i i am not an expert. >> forget about 2012, do you believe today the administration used a lack of transparency to its advantage? >> i believe the affordable care act was debated extensively. >> so you were lying in

2012? >> i was conjecturing. >> what you said just now is in direct opposition. it it was either a lie today or ally in 2012. >> i believe the affordable care act -- >> so you were lying in 2012 >> i was trying to play amateur politician. >> i think the gentleman. i gather you are allowed to say things that just aren't true. when you are under oath you say the truth, right? >> yes, sir. >> i gather. i gather. i think the gentleman for your participation. i i am going to try to get this done. could we get the cost sharing reduction payment figures requested in the next ten days? fiscal year 1415.

>> fourteen payments. >> right. >> yes. >> good. can we get copies of contracts which include the opt out clause in the next ten ten days? >> yes. >> thank you. has any insurer participating in the 2015 affordable care act exchanges expressed any concern at any time to anyone, to your knowledge in the federal government regarding the lack of an appropriation of funds to make cost sharing reduction payments to insurers? >> not to me. i am not aware. >> okay. you know of no question? you have not heard through staff? >> no. >> okay. mr. gruber, i will be quick.

you sat on the advisory board and you made this comment about tortured scoring. i no the tortured scoring. let's go through it quickly. isn't quickly. isn't it true that the affordable care act received revenue years in which it was paying nothing out which allow for it to have revenue than on a long-term basis would not fail to have a deficit. by collecting attacks before they began paying out, that shifting cost the ten year window to show a balance that disappeared later but a balance that would not exist >> the affordable care act and have revenue collisions. >> we're not worried about the deficit. that is the tortured stuff you were talking about.

because they were able to not score certain things as expenditures, make certain assumptions and their and most importantly collect revenue during a time in which they were paying nothing out which gained them a score of revenue that on an ongoing basis, they started on that day the day the affordable care act began providing services and took only the revenue, they would have had a deficit. >> they started the day the affordable care act began, they would have showed a massive surplus. >> you are saying that -- are you sure you want to say that, your knowledge? in fact today was the payout you you want to say that the incremental medicaid payment

would, in fact, have had a surplus, not a deficit. >> my recollection of the numbers -- and i have not looked in a while -- by the end of the decade on a year-to-year basis the affordable care act lowered the deficit. i believe that would have been deficit. >> you are aware this cbo has revised the number and now show a deficit and have really since shortly after the parties changed and they redid their numbers. are you aware that they show a deficit? they no longer stand behind the numbers trying passage? i sure wish you had been aware of it. you had not heard that. >> i don't think so. >> we will check on that. >> one of the things that i think about and talk about

is that we have a a limited amount of time to be in these offices. i am so sorry, mr. gruber, that you said what you said. you said. you can call it conjecture, whatever. what it does is distract. it it distracts from all of the good things that are being done with regard to this law. that is the most painful part of all of this. wait for the affordable care act to go into effect. story after story after story. we have to spend all this time dealing with something, mr. gruber, that you were conjecturing about. you ought to learn from this. watch what you say. and i'm so sorry to hear.

i know you wanted to say something. what did you want to say? >> first of all, express my sorrow. follow up with the dc exchange. so anyway, ms. kayfive, i hope you you we will go out there and continue to work hard to make this work. we have to protect people, try to keep people well and help families stay strong. when we have an unhealthy population we have an unhealthy country. mr. gruber, you know, you can call it amateur politics, whatever you want to call it. i always try to keep site of the big picture.

i think sometimes we get so caught up that we don't deal with the bigger picture, the life-and-death situations. thank you all. >> i am going to close the hearing. thank you for your participation. i suspect that this is an unusual event for you. you carried yourself well. perhaps if you we will post a few videos you we will get an opportunity. i think you saw here that a number of members don't buy that you were saying one thing that you did not believe. you believed a lot of what you said. in the case of tortured accounting, only six years worth of payout, it was

tortured, is tortured. no free lunch and paying a hundred percent, the major part of the new insured has a cost. the taxpayers are who we represent. the only reason you are back your today is you came with figures that were deceptive, needlessly deceptive. we can take bad news here. we have overseen a lot of agencies, problems of the secret service. we have been able to work without endlessly bringing people back when there is open and transparent delivering of information. you made some specific promises of delivering information. i trust that you we will keep those. no matter who sits in this chair, i can tell you,

mr. waxman would have been just as animated as we are here today. give us give us the bad news. give us what you have. even give us bad information in in the early days of the stimulus package. at the end of the day we accepted that they were giving us the best information. when they saw mistakes they corrected them. you have that opportunity. somebody else we will be here. if they call you back tell us what you don't know or leon, not only ask for facts later. i have said all along the problem with this administration is they did not live up to there promise the standard, the bar was low.

bad news at the latest possible date. i date. i want to thank the ranking member. he said that i made them better. he worked very hard to make me out to be better. i have learned a great deal. i i would do things differently with what i now no, but i would hope anyone that sits in this chair would never do less than i have done because it is our watch. it is our time, and i think you and i worked i worked hard to try to make sure this committee did as much as we could. my only regret is we could not do more. thank you. we stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> next on c-span2 president

obama is in nashville, tennessee. then the house oversight community hears from jonathan gruber on the health care law. >> on our next washington journal we talk more about the release of the senate intelligence committee report. intelligence writer kim delaney joins us. we will also talk to john bradshaw. later north dakota senator will weigh in and take your calls on the government funding deadline, the xl pipeline, and immigration. live each morning, and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> wednesday the house select community hears

testimony on the 2012 attack on us consulate and you we will be up that killed including ambassador chris stevens. secretary of state and state department inspector general live live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> a few of the comments we recently received from our viewers. >> very interested in this program, the american indians. we watched the whole thing. i came in and found it when i turned the tv on and watched watch what i could for about an hour and a half this program is absolutely wonderful. if it is going to be on again i will get you an even bigger audience by notifying

all of the local society and asking them to spread the word, something i have never seen before, and i do watch a lot of c-span. thank you. >> from greensburg, pennsylvania about american history tv. i love that channel every weekend i watch it almost religiously. i love all of the history stuff you have. please give us more history programs. history in the sense of,, you know, something before 195011960. if you if you want to have these political commentary type things from the 1970s on, that is fine later during the week or

something, but not during the history weekend. i really love your history lectures. i would like to have another chance to here that or see it again several months later,, like today instead of his reaganite you have on here ranting about how bad the government is. >> i love c-span. i love the nonfiction books, and, and i love when you have the book fair. i am always elated on the weekend watching c-span. it's the best thing i do. my friends teaches history at a junior a junior college, and i never used to be interested. now i am. thank you very much. >> continue to let us know. call us, e-mail us, or you can send us a tweet.

join the conversation, conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> new jersey senator testified tuesday on policing practices and recent protests in the wake of numerous shootings of unarmed black man. here is a look at his testimony. >> this is a very, very personal issue. children from newark, new jersey stand up every day and say the pledge of allegiance. these last few weeks we have seen tens of thousands of americans taking to the streets in anguish and rage and frustration, and i agree that it is too early to draw

conclusions when there are federal investigation still going on, on, and i appreciate the sensibility of his remarks. please understand that the anguish folks are feeling on the street, the anguish that has penetrated this body, being pulled aside by senate pages and many people we walk by who do the dignified, important yet menial work with asked me, please do something about this. what are they talking about? many of you know i was raised in a community which my family, the first black family to integrate to the area. area. my classmates and teammates were all white growing up. my dearest and closest friends now, i feel blessed and privileged that i i have people like blood to me of all different backgrounds. i know growing up

experiences, and my parents talked to us about police officers , behavior, dramatic differences between the exhortations of black parents, latino parents, and white parents. i remember us a saintly my parents lecturing me with anger in her voice that i did not have the margin of error when it comes to experimenting with drugs or other behaviors that others had. what i want to do right now is put this in context. put it to context to a horrible history in our country, the history of bias that we are desperately trying to work our way out of. in my lifetime we have seen something happened and is remarkable on planet earth which is the explosion of the american prison system to the.where america has 5%

of the globe's population, 25% population, 25 percent of the world, of humanities imprisoned people. by god, we do not have a country that has more criminals, more criminality, war crimes then china or russia or india. in that explosion of criminality has made us see an 800 percent increase in the federal prison population. half of those prisoners at the federal level are nonviolent offenders, nonviolent, not picking up guns, not beating people in the streets, not assault. we as americans unlike any other country. the burden of. the burden of spending a quarter of a trillion dollars carrying the system. and the.that is felt in the anguish of staff i talked to in the senate and people protesting is not the specifics of cases but the knowledge that we all have,

none of my colleagues have denied to me that the system is woefully bias against minorities in our country. >> you can see the entire testimony and the full senate judiciary subcommittee hearing on criminal justice and policing practices anytime on our website, c-span.org. >> pres. obama president obama took part in that town hall meeting to talk about immigration issues and his executive order answering questions on deportation, undocumented minors, and a path to citizenship. this is an hour and ten minutes. [applauding] [inaudible conversations]

>> nationally and internationally people are talking about our city, not just today. some people attribute national greatness to our cowboy boots and a vibrant downtown. we know we no that none of that is truly what makes us special. significant and distinct. a power is in our people. like the people here today who are paving the way and giving inspiration to the nation in the fight for immigration policies that uphold core american values of family and justice. justice. for the last few days everyone has been asking about nashville, the chosen stage for the president to speak on immigration. the answer is simple. it is because our president

finds liberation and the people of nashville who are striving to build a truly inclusive city for all from the nativeborn to the immigrant neighbors moving forward. whether we have been here for five generations or arrived from mexico, we are creating opportunity for dialogue to confront the fears about the changing community and to find common ground in this one reality. the movement of people from one place to another is a common thread in the history of humanity. we gather here today to thank our president after 25 years of stagnation and to engage in a conversation with him about the unfinished job of comprehensive immigration reform. we welcome him. the gateway to national and international effort. a beautiful example of what

is possible when roots and possibilities are celebrated on behalf of our partners it is my distinct honor to welcome the president of the united states of america, mr. barack obama. [applauding] >> thank you. thank you, everybody. thank you. thank you so much. everybody, please have a seat. thank you so much. you so much. [applauding] thank you so much. everybody, please have a seat. have a have a seat. well, hello, nashville. thank you for the wonderful introduction. i brought some friends with me who i think you may know,

your congressman, jim cooper. [applauding] as well as congressman: from memphis is here. [applauding] i want to thank -- is your mayor still here? where did he go? there he is. what a great job. [applauding] a wonderful daughter. we we have to brag about her. [applauding] when you are the father of daughters your job is to embarrass them. i want to thank for hosting us and for being home to so many organizations that do important work welcoming immigrants to the community. that is why i have come here today. i won't make a long speech

because i want to have a dialogue. i want to give some remarks at the top. some people might think nashville is an odd place to talk about immigration. it is not what comes to mind when people think about gateways to america, but as all of you no nashville has one of the fastest-growing populations in the country. from somalia, nepal, laos, mexico, bangladesh, and nashville happens to be the home of the largest kurdish community in the united states as well. they are us. they work as teachers in our schools, doctors in our hospitals and police officers in our neighborhoods. they start small businesses at a faster rate than many nativeborn americans. ..

>> >> business owners who treats to there workers' right sometimes are undercut by competition by those who

are not just hiring undocumented workers are not paying or not minimum-wage or no benefits that they have earned. nobody likes the idea of somebody we've been there rewards about late responsibilities as well. to and they're all kinds of folks who want to replace those responsibilities but they have no way to come out of the shadows to get right with a lot. a year-and-a-half ago republicans and democrats and independents in the senate including both of your senators passed a bipartisan bill to fix the broken immigration system. the bill was not perfect but a common-sense compromise to double border patrol agents agents, illegal -- the system smarter and faster in millions of chance to her and their citizenship it was

right for the economy not only that it would grow the economy faster but shrink the deficit faster and the house called for the up or down vote it would have passed. it would be the lot and on the way to solve the problem in a sensible way. but for a year-and-a-half republican leaders blocked the simple up or down vote. i believe the best way to solve is by working together to pass the common-sense laws of the senate. but until then the actions have the legal authority to make this system smarter than the fair. to provide more resources at the border to stop illegal crossings.

we will focus resources on those that pose a threat rather than criminals or children to bring more undocumented immigrants out of the shadows to bring a criminal background check, pay taxes, i contribute more to our economy. it is a path to citizenship that can only be done by congress. for those to make come in the future but it does create a system of accountability of middle ground approach that and tell congress fixes the program legislatively, if you have deep ties to this country and do what you need to do to not be worried about being separated from

your kids. these are actions taken by every president republican and democrat over the last 50 years so if they questioned by have the authority to do this, i will answer yes and pass a bill. [laughter] if you want congress to be involved then pass a bill to address that in a common-sense way. i want to work with both parties to get it done. and some of the changes that i is to have become permanent. unfortunately the only response we have had out of the house was a vote taken last week to force workers to leave the country rather

than separate families for them to do their job we need congress to work with us to pass a common-sense lot. and washington and should not let disagreements, that is not how democracy works. we see the economy move forward. is certainly my administration is ready to go on of range of issues. even those who know we need to reform the system may be concerned about congress not to get it done then worry about changing a the fabric of our society. and i understand those concerns.

but as a country we have had these concerns of the irish and the polls came to boston and new york with chinese and japanese americans and a traveling out west. but as the facts show generation after generation with of plus to society so we prove that is still the case we prove we can address these concerns together to make sure it works for everybody to strengthen our committee to talk about the concerns and a constructive way rather than yelling at each other. so let me close as working to bring people together.

where is he? [applause] david used to run the refugee rights coalition and some were skeptical and he also knew there were good people. so he saw an opportunity and in 2005 he started welcome tennis dtec connect to long-term residents to have tenders, church socials, rotary clubs, and folks got to know each other and they would see themselves in the new arrivals. the conversations were not always easy but to created a foundation of mutual understanding and respect

and as expanding across the country. with these efforts going around 42 cities around the country this is what makes america exceptional. and it keeps us young and invigorated and striving and pushing the boundaries of what is possible. then rebind ourselves together around similar ideas. and one generation later they are americans like everybody else and we have the same dreams and hopes and aspirations for them. if we keep harnessing the potential there is no limit to what that country can achieve.

so to get the conversation right if that happens around the country eventually will drift to the house of representatives then we will get the comprehensive legislation we need to solve the problem. so with that i will take questions. thank you very much. [applause] i have a microphone here. there is no rules and just raise your hand. it to do it yourself keep your question relatively brief and i will try to keep my answer is relatively brief. i don't always succeed.

[laughter] who wants to go first? >> hi mr. president. vicki so much for coming. my question is this is a concern in the community what will happen with the next administration if they decide not to follow the executive action? and i think many of the community is of trade their first deadline to give the information. >> that is the good question.

i will go over the mechanics of what will happen. first of all, part of what we're saying is we cannot deport 11 million people. it up would be foolish to try. as well as wrong. , gristle the allocates a certain amount of money to the immigration system so we have to prioritize. my priority is not to separate families but to try to make sure borders are secure and people come through the right way. to focus on criminals that have a risk to our society. so the department of homeland security said they

will separate days from the subjects of deportation. with those to pose the threat at the bottom of our though law-abiding. so of that list you will not be a priority for a deportation. we will not separate families. that applies to everybody. all 11 million people better here. whenever the number is. even if somebody did not sign up their much less likely. because we changed our priorities in a formal way.

but what we're also saying is american children were legal permanent residents residents, you can register been submitted to a criminal background check and pay any back taxes then you get as a piece of paper that gives the insurance you can work without fear of deportation. that does not apply to of betty but roughly 5 million, about half of the undocumented workers. adapting is a temporary just like the program we put in place for young people who were brought here better otherwise good citizens.

we did that several years ago where it does not make sense to subject these young people tuz said deportation risk. they are americans and their hearts even if they don't have a piece of paper. it is temporary but subject to renewal. it is true in a future administration may try to reverse some of our policies -- policies. but i will be honest i think the american people basically have a good heart and want to treat people fairly. and every survey shows that in fact, if somebody comes out to subject themselves to a background check cover registered, pay taxes the american people support allowing them to stay. so any future administration

that tries to punish people for doing fell right thing does not have the support of the american people. their real question is, how to read make sure you ask people register so it is not just a few pockets around the country? that will require a lot of work by local agencies agencies, municipalities, ch urches coming community organizations to give people confidence they can register and also make sure they understand they don't have to hire a lawyer or go to the notary in order to pay for this. what we saw when the young people were given the

opportunity people signed up but if you give us $2,000 we will help you. you don't have to do that. we have to build an effective network around the country the department of romance security is working with local organizations to make sure people get the right information but we need to make sure that the american people actually are fair minded and want to reward people to do the right saying. if you register, i am confident that will be something that allows you to get on the path with your children to watch them grow up as you have. the last point.

it's still important because it is temporary to make sure we keep pushing for comprehensive immigration reform. without an actual law or statute it is true theoretically a future administration could do something damaging. it is not likely that they could reverse everything but it could be or that some people could be in a disadvantageous position nobody has an actual path to citizenship until the of law is passed. the senate blocked calls for people to go to the back of the line. but at least there is that pathway and there are some areas like the high-tech businesses that are looking

for young graduates from computer science programs around the country and instead of putting them to work their starting new businesses someplace else and that does not make sense we could not do anything administratively about that now i will go boy girl boy girl. [laughter] >> thank-you. good afternoon president. i was on documented for many years. and detective fantasia of the amnesty.

-- and i took good vintage of the amnesty. with that policy i am also from chicago. but my question what about those that are in limbo to be deported? and people that are skeptical are afraid to apply. so will -- what with the administration do to get up the confidence for these programs? >> i sort of incident but i will one more time. the priority of deportation even if you don't do anything. this will take time.

to get the vice officers at the ground level to understand where the new priorities are a of supply than in a consistent way. and there will be stories were a family is separated that overtime we will push to retrain and repair ties to understand on focus on criminals, felons, but not families. in terms of setting up the system with that piece of paper it will take a couple of months. in the disk is time to communicate through our

cities and towns to make sure people have good information. so the fox is in limbo to be a part of that process that i described. >> otherwise there earn much less likely for a deportation than they were in the past and they don't have to do anything for that but the registration and process, if you qualify is powerful because now you can work without being in the shadows and you are now paying taxes because we want people to be above board to do things the right to way.

and those who register, my belief is when we do finally passed a law, those to of taken the time to register and pay taxes and goes to the criminal background check with documentation they will have an easier time to qualify for a more permanent legal status because they would have already gone through the screening. but building trust will take time. that is where you come in. i will work with you and other activist here to make sure it happens but but you do have the incredible courage of month the young people when we announced

teeeighteen but we got more than half. engaged person who has the courage to sign up creates more confidence across the board. go-ahead. >> mr. president thanks for giving us this opportunity. i would ask you with the refugee rights coalition i would fight to rescue from

the executive order but not immediately. but will they be saved from being in this situation? >> no. i would encourage anybody who has another path for the legalization to follow that path. but with his other avenues you are pursuing to get a legal permanent resident status source citizenships

through the existing laws and you should feel free to continue that. but fisker is an opportunity to make scheerer it is not going to happen. which will extend for several years. >> can i have my cup of tea please? and the gentleman in the back. >> i am an immigrant to do national and have lived here for the last 12.

one of the of many things i appreciate is the way you approach the most difficult of problems for those that disagree. trying to talk with recent only to be greeted by a deeper emotion and rhetoric and anchor. it is like we need disability plan the office of civility may be for the u.s. congress. [laughter] but i am serious foul laundry get them to react but with that tone to have you present? >> first of all, i don't

know anyone that is more subtle. [laughter] [applause] he is an extraordinary gentleman and always has been since i had a chance to know him when i came to washington. in it is ironic. unless you are a member of a native american tribe you came here from someplace else. or your people did. and i know that sometimes pulled stock about to come here the al right way. with the previous generations through ellis island with the other ways

to arrive here. but we overstate the degree that was an elaborate bureaucratic process. there is the reason that these days people named smith then somebody said what is your name if they could not pronounce it dead you would hear stories they changed it. ready times the papers were not checked because bolts may not have had papers. and who came in and who

didn't is depended on how pay to of a workforce are how much industry was looking for a new labor. and aunt what that political climate was that the particular time. and what i tried to do when i talk about these issues is put yourself in somebody's but if you are an american somebody was an american. it was not always meet and order of the -- order of

the. as the population expanded across the west but that is why because of efforts that greasy a national the was saying how i have almost 40,000 and a correspondence many of them say keep going. some say you're an idiot along with those asking for help but multiple times i have never understood ito's

degree with you, i am of vision but his best friend jose and he helped make wash my car. i love him. i don't think it is right that this young person should not be treated this say why i would want somebody to treat my son. so even though i still don't agree with you, i'd to ask

that you give jose a chance. that is where the building comes from. but it is important to realize their runs both ways. i have been at the receiving end but for anybody that is

concerned, with the impact of immigration that they must be racist or anti-immigrant or they're ignorant and that is not true either. there are people and those who believed in emigration but are concerned that it will depress wages particularly in the lowe's sector but those are legitimate questions and we have to be just as civil as expect people to be read

every talk to them. because the facts are often our side. a of studies have shown five overtime emigrants are not lowering wages but contributing to the economy and boosting jobs for everyone. rather make the argument that just because somebody thinks that instinctual lead does not mean that so it is good but doesn't just go one way. is this is true in politics.

>>. >> talking about immigrants immigrants, one question that i have was there a particular reason why the mitt to be bound by the legal authority. >> the office was a special office in the department of justice.

>> dan to give church shouldn't about what our legal authorities are. so we presented to them the various things relate to do. they were very clear about my megalosaur a -- my a legal authority to prioritize and provided this temporary protection for parents whose children are american citizens or permanent residence because the argument they found compelling, was the humanitarian argument if we prioritize why would be separate families?

the challenge that we had with the office of legal counsel if you have already exempted the young people through daca then bootstrap off of that, you were not return it originally for somebody that is a citizen or a legal permanent resident so though legal constraint is not because we did not care about those parents and there are those that are concerned their parents may not qualify. a sizable number due because there is a sibling who was born in the united states but not all of them. this is one more reason why

we need to pass comprehensive immigration reform. so to do everything said they could within my veto authority but not go beyond the legal authority that we possessed. >> thank you mr. president. i was on did rise three council my question to you is and in late 2004 cut when

it comes to use the issue of immigration but what do you think you could tell americans considering with the new act of congress? because i was of privilege to be the director but those people who are in charge but what good do say to the rest of the nation that now they get special treatment?

>> i ridgecrest the nation when i said this action and i made some simple points. first of all, america is a nation of immigrants but also laws said there needs to be an accountability that was not in accordance with of lot than that question is how you make that person accountable? one way is sporadically skipping families. but you don't have even formed an enforcement. bayou use of those resources instead of strengthening borders. that is not a smart outcome.

the second approach is to pass laws that say let's improve the of the goal system because sometimes people would be qualified if this system was of little smoother but then they have a situation to wait years to be reunited with a family member. the heartache becomes too great so some cases may push them into the illegal system because we don't make the legal system smarty enough. we can get people out of the shadows and acknowledge our neighbors and friends and co-workers. then you have to be serious about border security.

but the activists who say. >> why should we? but in the eyes of god every pretty is equal. there is a child in mexico or guatemala, libya, that is the equal of my child. i don't make any claims my child is superior to somebody else's child. but i of the president of the united states and asian states have porter's. -- nation states have borders. as do most countries around the world. if we enforce the law then people will not try to come here. you don't have that many.

but if you have to have of mine. is kidnapped be whoever gets your first in is a lot harder to get here. what we try to do is to have a system that would reset and acknowledge. most of their cabs recognize those that have been here 10

years or 20 years they have shown themselves to be good people, the kids are americans so adjust acknowledged they are a part of our society but the trade-off is to make that legal system fairer. . .