a way of anti-muslim sentiment in america. and that was the time when i remember i was getting letters of support from catholics,

protestants, from cyborg is fatally condemned those who are intelligent in this kind of muslim rhetoric and opposing human growth and development. we are opposed to them. they are not representative. but that they had been many times before. they said this time we need to do something much more. so they decided that they would come to washington d.c. and they would articulate this kind of rejection and the airtime of form, the sentiment that was going at this time. so september 1920, 2010, we had a major press conference in the national press building, where we had religious people there representing all these different organizations. there they did the same thing we had to doing. they've checked it something

more than not. they sat together and they created a campaign called shoulder to shoulder with american muslims of american values. and you know what american values are. they said that if these people who are christians and jews for attacking islam in america are not allowing muslim this to freely crack as their religion, we cannot allow this to happen because attacking one religion in america is attacking all religions. and they are actually robbing america of the greatest legacy of religious scholars and respect for diversity that generations have in this country. therefore, we are going to oppose this in america.

they advised the position of the director of shoulder to shoulder with american muslims and anti-muslim bigotry. the office is now under capitol hill -- and this shoulder to shoulder american muslim is bolstered -- so you are welcome to comment discuss how the christians and jews are defending muslim interests or muslim representation in america and they have done a wonderful job. four years growth on this organization in opposing this kind of islam a phobia in america. you must have seen yourself, you are mentioning yourself and

let's like anti-muslim bigotry was a respect bull discourse at that time. but these people have ensured that they cannot totally destroyed that kind of anti-muslim sentiment, but it is no more respect to bold discourse. you are living in an environment where is mom, judaism, nature representatives, organizations and institutions together at debating and creating an environment of mutual respect and religious freedom and you can imagine what that means. when i turn on the television and i hear that a church has been burned in pakistan or i hear something of this nature has happened anywhere in the world, it becomes my responsibility. it becomes a part of my islamic

responsibility to come forward and see what could be done in exactly that is what we have been doing. i've just come back last week as you know from abu dhabi. we have in the international conference have to deal with this kind of violent extremism. so what we are doing from country to country, jointly with our christian and jewish partners, every country we have no religions for peace and then we have the world religions for peace. we are part of that. so we go to different countries, identify muslim scholars and leaders and leaders from other communities who have a similar understanding of their faith so that we are able to create a new reality. it is amazing. i can't read out to the

community that we helped pass in abu dhabi. i went to pakistan with the similar kind of delegation but the christian leaders and leaders that the minority there for me to start in the churches that i've been burned. it was amazing to them that muslims in america are collecting funds to help the christians in pakistan to rebuild them and this is happening country to country. it is amazing. you will feel in tunisia in the sense that when the arab spring came, it was an opportunity to redefine what kind of governments they are going to have. we were very keen that now they have this freedom, they should have a democratic environment where there is total freedom of religion. we succeeded in tunisia in

particular because we have direct relationships with the islamist organization mayor with the leaders they are and several of the comings and goings here, in our sector in america, our prosperity of the islamic community in america is because america has given us freedom of religion. therefore it is the islamic understanding enshrined in those constitutions that they should give also full freedom to their minorities. so that is -- we will have more detail later. best wishes and be sure that you have my brochures for more understanding. [applause]

>> i don't know about you, but i've learned a lot already. very impressive panelists. i will start with a joke you're the only terrorism joke right now it's about a guy who goes onto an airplane and he stops because in a suitcase he is carrying a bomb. they say to him, what are you doing? the chances of somebody on a plane carrying a bomb are one in a million, but the chances of two on a plane carrying a bomb are one in 100 million. so that was it anyway. i think to deal with this topic, one of the first things that is required is a sense of honesty. we have to be honest. we have to be willing to face ourselves. we have to be willing to look in the mirror and look into our own faith traditions and each other.

and in that context, that's why today's discussion has been so refreshing and a right thing. one of the mistakes that we in the west so often make is that we don't realize how seriously people take religion. we in america are such an open and tolerant society. even mom and professor sayyid has taught him so beautifully how it enriches our religions. on 9/11 were showing the rest of the world of the beautiful interfaith service at how people really hot hands arm to arm from the full spectrum of religious traditions. the point i'm trying to make is for most americans, even for most practicing -- most americans who practice religion, we don't quite realize and understand how religion can drive someone to commit acts of

extremism, how people can feel so passionately about the vegan. he instead perceive it as being irrational. we instead perhaps try an attribute group causes of violence to economic issues, two other things and get a really sometimes is a simple ideology and religion. so we dare not dead nor how important and significant that is. we ignore it at our own peril. and thirdly, what is the crux of the problem? part of the crux of the problem has to do with the inability that people have to be able to be tolerant and accepting of those whose belief system is different than their own. at the end of the day, if you strip it away, isn't that so much of what isis is saying and so much of what al qaeda is saying and what other extremist religious groups motivated by religion primarily in the muslim faith at this time are saying? and that is we wish to seek to

impose their religious beliefs upon others and have difficulty accepting the fact that not everyone is going to believe what they believe. practice what they practice. if we understand that, we also understand that it has two aspects in which it is played out. number one is the one we think about so much and that is in terms of the churches that are blown up in muslim countries that was alluded to before. it is the reason for the dope underground group seizing them forcibly converting several hundred schoolgirls in so on. the other dimension to it all is internal. it is the reason why within the past century there have been more acts of violence committed by muslims against other muslims than by any other outsiders. so the problem is a manifestation of this particular aspect of having the very narrow belief system and one which then

seeks to impose it on others. i want to say that i think this is something all of us need to grapple with. all of us who believe in the power of religion, all of us who cracked his inner dedicated and devoted to the principles of religion because at the end of the day, it turns off everyone to religion. it turns off many people to religion altogether. i know i've had members of my congregation who have on occasion question yourself something to me and said a pox on everyone and not only do they feel turned off and disappointed by their own religion, but religion is a brand, as a whole. we need to be cautious about that and more so proactive. so what is it that we can learn? would need to turn to history, which has been alluded to in terms of historical examples given today. for example, as has been mentioned, in the 101,130 so, christianity was a religion

which was bent upon destruction, upon promulgating his own beliefs and that is what gave rise to the crusades. but the truth of the matter is eventually christianity came to turn from that particular way of life. i think for example about the holocaust and the seminary were anti-jewish history. if you look at the history of 2000 years of judaism and christianity in so many respects, while the holocaust is unique, it is a progression and an extension of 2000 years of anti-jewish violence and of all kinds of anti-jewish ideology. not to say that it is not unique. it is unique. but it is possible to see it as that extension. so where do we stand today? today i participated in numerous jewish christian, jewish catholic dialogue.

it counters where people of the christian faith view the term for holocaust. use the term, asking and wishing to deal and to repent and return and turn away. so what can only happen when there is that honesty that i referred to at the outset. so when christians are willing to honestly deal with their past, that is why there's been able to be a new path charted between the jewish world in the christian world since world war ii. one of the central issues is how does the society do with the extremist? professor isaac alluded to the fact in every society, every religion amongst every people and every country, there are going to be extremists. there will be those who will advocate for violence. the question really is, how does the rest of the society deal with that? did that become mainstream? is that what is praised order? is that what becomes isolated?

as professor alexander mentioned, we are now celebrating the holiday of hanukkah. i know this is being broadcast. i don't know if you can get a close-up of mitotic, but i'm worried a hanukkah tie. some of you know the story of chanukah is the story of the miracle that was discovered in the temple and the tools of oil which was supposed to last one night instead wound up lasting for how long? eight days. and that is why we like the hanukkah menorah and celebrate the holiday of hanukkah for eight days. it's the miracle of lights, the miracle of what they were able to achieve and the only problem with that is that many of us know, it is not really what happened. it is not really what happened. it was a victory in a very difficult, a very violent battle that existed and we know parts of that story.

but there is even against someone violence that occurred and what we know about this from the book of maccabees one and two. the story of the miracle of the oil, which is the one we tell our children and the one that so many people are familiar with was the creation -- is believed was the creation of the rabbi several hundred years later. i did that, but that's a required precisely because of the fact they were upset and can learn about the violence of the story. so in order to diminish that aspect of the story, we have this other part, which what was raised to prominence. what i would like to suggest is that shows an example of how religion can you conserve a corrective and how residuum can serve that role of helping to promote the values of peace, the values of bringing light to the

world. there are numerous other examples because sometimes i get frustrated when i hear people say to me if i were to read the bible we would find instances of extremism there were instances of judaism as well. while there are, the thing that is so important as what is the response of normative judaism? what is the response of the corrective aspect? here's something we can all learn from. not to give too many examples, but another one that comes to my mind, the story of ted basu went and staff individuals of the mennonites who are cohabitating with the israelite was a violation of oral law. the next section of the torah tells us he was given a brief shalom, a covenant of peace. he was rewarded for what he did, but again, that same tradition that basically proposed the story of the miracle of the oil was quick to add it wasn't necessarily given to him as a note or.

or rather, it was presented as a corrective. that is why he was given the covenant of peace in order to restrain it, not necessarily rewarded. i think what we need to do with emphasize those aspects of our tradition. if we fast-forward to today, how was it that we deal with extremism and ultimately will be the responsibility of the religious organizations. we look at, for example, the horrible situation several years ago when there were cartoons in the danish papers which brought about islands in so much death in so many different capitals of the world because of the portrayal of mohammed in those cartoons. i couldn't help but think about that instance and a couple years before that, some of you may remember when juliana was the mayor, there is a portrayal of jesus, which was extremely offensive. somebody was on jesus.

it was absolutely absurd and inappropriate and inoffensive. but there were no riots. there were no riots. maybe it has to do with what i said before about not how people take religion seriously insert areas, maybe it has to do with that correct this. maybe it has to do with the understanding of people in american society were disappointed that we talk these things out. i think those are the examples we need to keep in mind. when i was in israel a few years ago, there was graffiti that was written on the wall and there was a trial for a woman elaborate graffiti on the wall. i hesitate to say it, but said mohammed is a. the woman who wrote it was caught and sentenced to four years in prison. that is what i say when the society deals with the extremist of the message to the rest of the society. should religion play a role? absolutely. a number of years after 9/11 and turn anti-fata and people carrying out suicide terrorist

attacks and israel and also in the world as we see in the past week so many instances in pakistan and elsewhere. i would love to see him maybe professor sayyid syeed, you can promote international statement by leaders of religions across the world saying there is no place in heaven for suicide bombers. just as simple as that. it has many faith leaders as we can. i will find a theater. because we all need to do that. i'm just saying because you better international connections than i do. so i just want to conclude with the story. one of my favorite stories this from the same sources that developed the talmud as well. the story told by abraham, the father of judaism and three great religions was in the desert and as you know he was one of the wonderful attributes of abraham was that the

attribute of welcoming strangers and visitors. in fact, open on all four sides so you wouldn't have to walk around in order to find the front door to come in. it just so happened in the middle of a terrible wind storm in the desert, a man came to him in the middle of the night and he happened to find that the man was a fire worshiper. what abraham learned of this committee was so incensed and so upset because he knew that god god prohibited pollution idols and other forms of worship that were not of one god. so he kicked them out into the night and according to the story that night, god appeared to abraham and efficient that to him, abraham, don't you realize i've put up with this man's ignorance for 70 years. couldn't have tolerated for just one night? said that it's hard message of tolerance and understanding me to bring as well. thank you.

[applause] >> well, thank you for having me so much here today to share with you. i spent 10 years in d.c., so this is different than many of you who know what i usually talk about, which might be refreshing for some of you. tamara had an opportunity to go to iraq which all of us are very aware of the situation they are with 79 and what is happening to christians and many other religious communities. when i was there, one of the questions that kept coming up and really follows on a lot of what the rabbi had to say is what is -- how do we respond,

what do we do, how can we survive in the future? is there a way to overcome the terrorism, violence as a society? one of the women i met many of you may remember is the member of parliament who gave a passionate plea to parliament in the beginning of august saying my people are dying en masse ajar. these help to did finally after a day as they sent in helicopters and again to rescue some of these. when i met, she said we had 72 genocides against our community and our history. this is the 73rd and we can't survive if this continues. i asked her, one that was working on iraq all of the epic commissioner when i was working for the congressman and afterwards, we kept trying to discuss the religious dimension of the conflict and the need to invest in religious freedom in iraq and was constantly ignored. i said what is your response to

that? she said we cannot ignore religious freedom if we want any future for democracy for peace, for coexistence in this country. our people will not survive, christians will not survive. the cockeyed, bischoff bought, it is impossible for us to have a country if we continue to ignore this country. now i come to u.s. the president and founder of an organization called hardwired. hardwired for me is how i've made and how all of a sudden it, which is to worship him at to believe in something bigger than ourselves. the religious dimension of who we are as human beings is something that cannot be ignored. 86% of the worlds population recognizes some religion. the rest are not necessarily unreligious. but the religious dimension of conflict also cannot be ignored here to can't be ignored in iraq or any other countries are places where we've discussed. so i leave you with that question and i want to move on

to sudan. the question is what can we really do? i will respond to that by the end. when i began hardwired, i've been working for a couple years in iraq and other countries, beginning to work with religious communities and government officials, society beaters and many others to help the many grassroots level understand what religious freedom means, what human rights are and how they could actually articulate human dignity and human rights for everyone in societies where religious oppression was very prevalent, where intolerance and violence and terrorism are prevalent. how could they overcome that? over the last few years we've developed a training curriculum we have used in many countries. i want to explain how we used it in sudan because it relates to a situation related to terrorism in something practical that was done. as many of you know in sudan, you have a sitting president who was the only person indicted for

crimes of genocide and inhumanity against his people, both muslims and christians even though he does it on the basis of religious belief. he harbored osama bin laden for many years when he was plotting terrorist attacks against u.s. embassies throughout africa. as a terrorist nation in many respects. it is considered under the u.s. sanctions. so not a great place to be. a few years ago when the south seceded from sudan, some of the christians in the north approached me and said tina, we want to add to pay for to add the paper writes a constitution that we don't have to do that. can you help us? i went and brought together the council of churches and we talked of what international law says about their rights come on religious freedom is in the interest of them and other members of society that are also oppressed by the government so women under sir shari'a laws as we've seen this past summer and

also muslims and therefore would've been victims of genocide in sudan. and many others. as they drafted a constitutional provision on religious freedom by the end of our time together, their provision ended up defending the segment principle of freedom as a norm for everybody. they recognize if this basis of religious freedom isn't protected in our society for everybody, we will not move forward. so we came back together a few later with several christian lawyers over members of the council of churches as well as muslim lawyers, indigenous believers and women that were involved in the communist movement as well. so pretty broad factors society. and when the women heard what these men had come up with him and these christian men, and they realized that they were willing to stand in their

defense because they didn't have a constitution that protected the rights of everyone, even women under certain laws that provide their freedom and dignity, they wouldn't have any freedom in the country and the future. a young man, a muslim from darfur were also felt the same way and so this group came together in a way that to sudan. they got this provision that was drafted, adopted in the draft constitution and then they began to work with civil society or a sudan to build education and fairness at a very local level of why religious freedom, the freedom of religious expression, belief, thought, conscience, for everybody that was critical to the foundation made at the time. so that was happening over the last few years. this past summer, everything we were doing was put to the test because many of you may have heard the story of marion abraham, the young woman was basically as pregnant as i am,

eight and a half months. she presented to death for apostasy. what was the response? you might remember seven years ago in sudan and other incident with the british schoolteacher who had a teddy bear and her class, one of the students in her class was allowed to name the school teddy bear and he named it mohammed and there was major higher rates and can't for the teacher imprisoned for 15 days and finally got her out of there. seven years later, what happened? was of the response? no. the reason there was the same responses because of the education reinvested in the community over the last solar years and also the openness to democracy and ideas that have been under the peace agreement. let me explain what happened behind the scenes and most people never hear about in the media. must have our work reacquired about, so you would of heard anyway. when miriam was sentenced, the lawyers we had trained began to

work with her lawyers and shia to at the time that expanded to five. all of her lawyers are muslim. they were not christians in her defenses. they were muslim and daily statements and every human being, everyone in sudan deserves religious freedom. the students that we worked with over the years stood out front of the courthouse in sudan. this is unheard of and protested in her defense and made statements saying we are miriam. this is a christian woman, which in many countries would be not treated in this way and yet they stood in her defense, opposition leaders and statements of several people we worked with were able to get those are the opposition leaders come even the islam a party in sudan made a statement in her defense. the time they were imprisoned by the sheer, but they made a statement in her defense. they held press conferences. the amount of activity to have

been on the ground at a grassroots level by the people standing in defense of a woman considered an apostate in saying she deserves religious freedom and this is the foundation wanted our country was remarkable and not happened because of years of after helping them understand what religious freedom means. that is what is going to counter terrorism in countries like sudan and iraq in many other countries do not is what hardwired. and so, take that example and go back to iraq. as i was buried in meeting with the leaders had worked with for years and hearing the stories about was happening to their community and the syrians and others, it is heartbreaking to censure anyone who watches a new sales or pakistan or anywhere else i'm at it is heartbreaking. most people in the world are religious and we don't want to say that for any human being. the key is if we can't spread at the very local level and

understanding of the equal dignity and humanity of the other person, they won't be about to break down the intolerance, bigotry, the things they do within their own religious community as the other panelists mentioned. better necessary for challenging ideologies that are growing like ideologies of isis or ideologies about islam, which the majority of the population jackscrew the training has really been a critical aspect of what we do and it's because four years working in congress we are always too late. usually the problems have been going on for so many years and the people didn't know how to respond themselves. so he looked for leadership, that comes with political baggage as we are ready now. if we help them on the ground respond, that will be that much more effective.

one is of the questions that needs to occur. what i've mentioned his education and training at a local level. that is the population think differently about the other person on religious freedom. that is critical to mobilize public support for changes in laws. if you don't have both of those, you really can't have either as a defense mechanism to prevent extremism from growing. so you need legal changes not is one of the things hardwired us. i want to actually added something about indiana because much of the conversation has been centered around islam and the middle east. 1.2 billion people live in indiana. in my opinion, it is one of the fastest growing basis for homegrown terrorism in the world. the reason i say that is because the only sitting head of state

who was denied a visa to the united states on the basis of violating religious freedom because he allowed, he gave orders to police to stand down when hindu nationalists were attacking a group of muslims in his state back in 2002. in my opinion, it is extremely disturbing the u.s. congress, republicans and democrats want to bring this man to our country and offer him a free place to sit in congress, both houses of congress to talk about whatever it is he wanted to talk about. maybe economics or prosperity while ignoring the fact this man is responsible for the growth of one of the greatest grants to religious tolerance, pluralism in the world today. not islam, but hindu nationalism and the threat of those in india. there's been a lot of discussion about islamic extremism. it is real obvious with isis.

what is happiness such a large scale in india for so many years and can't be ignored except at our own peril. that is what we've seen in iraq. religion and religious dimension of conflict was ignored and that's why we at the situation today. we can change that in iraq in india and some of the other places where we have a huge percentage change on the scale of how much growth areas of religious oppression extremism if we invest in education and training at the local level. if we continue to empower leaders that espouse ideas that are intolerant of other communities, that allow for violence and terrorism against those communities, we should not expect anything different. a lot of the discussion about religious leaders needing to speak out is extremely important. i changed the title of the topic for the role of religion to the role of the individual because

most of the world are religious as i mentioned. we have a belief that we follow and if individuals, regardless of whatever pulley system to follow bullies and dignity of the human person and ability to have the freedom of religion, then that will enable greater defense accounts the growth of extremist ideas that are allowed to foment when people use religion to their own political advantage. i'm going to conclude there, the thank you you do look forward to answering questions later. [applause] >> i am aware of the lasting between you and conversation ourselves with the moderator. i do want to start off and i'm just going to give you three

concepts that will help us sum up some of the things discussed today and while it tries yes religion is still relevant in combating radical extremism and what are some of the best practices. so the three concepts are religion has three eyes, religious actors bringing 32 politics. they bring institutions. they bring ideas and imagination. institution, ideas and imagination. governments are not wired to deal with all sorts of nonstate actors. violet nonfat or is, governments are wired to other sovereign states. they don't get nonstate actors and particularly religion. they have a difficult time. when they get done at all in relief and development, they get a first come of the way in which religious institutions may help provide the goodie basket of

charity and relief and development in response to famine or natural disaster. they make it a little bit. but they really don't get the nonmaterial aspects. the other two, ideas and imaginations. the strongest responses that religious actors can bring to counter violent extremism or when you bring all three of those together. he institutions, and imagination. i think we need to demystify some minutes that are out there both about religious actors and about the overlay between religion and terrorism. one is resurgent around the world states are challenged i know that sounds counterintuitive to say the headlines, the 13 has brought out the religion is resurgent.

he gives 6% around the report that they believe in a supreme being and they practice religious or spiritual practices and really against the grain of what was predicted throughout the 20th century that god was dead, religion was dying. that turned out not to be true. the great soviet and communist experiments and battery not religion did not succeed in religion returned resurgent. so religion is expanding, not dead. that peace is breaking out. major conflicts declined by more than half since the end of the cold war around the world. that is major armed conflicts in which more than a thousand people die in battlefield deaths around the world. those are decreasing. that context does not help you if you are in one of the areas where war still exists. a global trend line is great if you are in columbia were 40 of civil war are starting to come

to the conclusion of peace accords around the way. philippines were 40 years of civil war are being resolved in the peace process well under way. it doesn't help in her back on a stereo or afghanistan. we have to be nimble enough to understand it can be sunny in florida and we mean in new york that it can be breaking out globally while there's still some very retag in violence in particular areas and we can understand religion can be expanding globally and still be part of the scene of the crime in some areas of violence. what do we know about the data lines and trends regarding terrorism? we know most terrorism does not fix the. most terrorist organizations go out of business in less than a year. they have a poor start of in a new business operation. most terrorist attacks killed no one. however, we also know that high casualty terrorist attacks on

the rise and most terrorism occurs in more zones. so terrorism is a very serious problem particularly in those remaining hot spots, those remaining war zones. so what does that mean for religious factors? if religious factors want to help contain violent extremism, we have to contain the world's wars. we have to help bring those wars to an end and that will bring terrorism to an end. the terrorism occurring in all of the acts of high-impact terrorist attacks, casualty terrorist attacks occurred those wars. so ending the war in iraq, syria, afghanistan, those will do a great deal towards declining terrorism and declining terrorist casualties. so that kind of focuses a little bit. there have been lots of efforts by religious actors to try to do

religious peacebuilding. some of those as mentioned here, the public statements by clerical leaders, decrying suicide bombing, terrorist attacks and stating that religious ideas do not support terrorism, do not support suicide bombers. those that committees are great and should be supported and continue. but they really only get at one of the three pairs so those kinds of public declaratory statements, particular actors and they ideas do not support that. that is one of the five. not all three. there is a program, for example, the sum of my students from the university of military have put together as part of counterterrorism, counter violent extremist programs in afghanistan where they took afghan community leaders, young males who were pretty illiterate and not well versed in their own

division by taliban idea and they simply brought them to jordan and introduced them to religious, islamic leaders in jordan and that helps them to very much expand their own religious literacy, their ideas of what islam stood for. their imagination of global islam and what an islamic community should and would be like and we were able to bring them back to afghanistan to have them be very important centers for legitimizing and moderating the tone of the local community. so that is a very interesting program. i kissed her to move the eyes and imagination. is not well institutionalized in a good model going forward. and not a good actor to be doing religious education on islam. locally owned, locally operated, et cetera. what are some the best programs out there where religious actors are helping to get through causes of violence to reduce the world's worst wars and

counterterrorist extremism? those are ones in which we see religious actors working together across that area mines bringing institutions behind programs do not just for interreligious dialogue, but interreligious action. we typed in that religious ideas can be used as a series of peas or to promote violence. peace is a high-level concept. certainly everyone can say we are favored here to have you operationalize that in social science or policy terms quite a better term would actually be social cohesion. what are religious actors doing to promote social cohesion? if you think about, for example, the 10 commandments, to abraham that tradition, what are the 10 commandments but a track for social cohesion? a very practical.

you can't have social cohesion in the community of people are killing each other, taking each other's partners, stealing property, dismissing and dishonoring each other salters. that is not a recipe for social cohesion of a community. city abraham that rules are really a recipe for social cohesion and religious actors are at the root trying to help promote. so how are they just that is out there creatively working to build social cohesion and either read more zones are the areas where conflict amongst large. they are trying to inoculate neighboring communities. we see activities for analysis when they are working to build cocoa cooperatives and gone on among islamic and christian, in areas to be able to have an economic development model. they are owned and operated.

they work together for their cocoa cooperatives. so that is an economic development model and has a peacebuilding minds to it because it presents the ideas of social cohesion, the imagination of being part of a larger community in these religious actors and hoping that developing mono go forward. we see these in creative attempts into nigeria to have interreligious action on counter malaria programs. it builds their trust building program that help increase relationship among the community and get at some of the root causes of conflict. we mentioned that in my own field of international relations, there's absolutely tuned and seek to dismiss religious act tears. all about politics, they you can go in the other extreme as well all about religion and there's no political or economic roots. out of those are false gods.

what do we know about conflict? we know that the areas where conflict returns that are subject to the conflict trap are those that have declined economy, declining gdp, and high youth bulge and then have a history of conflict in the last five years and particularly an economy not well diversified and natural resource dependent. a map of countries that have almost red flags. they are ones that are going to be prone to conflict on the economic concerns. and when you throw religious actors into that mix coming back in the field to the fire on a not ready tenuous circumstance. one other mr. bass. you hear religious at her is referred to as nongovernmental

act years. a friend and colleague at harvard university said religious act as ehrlich doctors without borders. they move across the international borders. that is just false. that is really, false. religious actors are not nonstate yours. this is not an academic splitting of hairs. this is understanding that religious actors with the exception of a few new ones, the mormons and scientology, the major world religions there are priest at yours. they existed millennia before the founding of the modern sovereign state in 1648 at the treaty of westphalia. it means there are three sub seven that are very developed in very old. you do not turn to doctors without borders and ask them for their law to dispute, to resolve

disputes among competing communities. doctors without borders doesn't have lies. it doesn't marry people. it doesn't very peaceful. it doesn't have a book of holy scriptures and holy ideas that people pray to. religious actors have laws, courts, constitutions. they have well developed ideas and imagination, but well developed institutions and public health and education, health care as well as a mom. so what does that mean? in states that are weak or failing, states that are corrupt or legitimate. so failing somalia, 18 legitimate nigeria for states that are predatory. sudan where they are killing their own population. syria were the government is the one doing the killing. in states that are not working here people say who can return

to? what other institutions are out there? they are going to be turning to pre-state that airs for those institutions that those actors can provide. so the strongest responses to counter violent extremism are those that combine those three i's in the institution, ideas and imagination in the way up with most social cohesion with conflict that is interreligious as we see in south sudan, sudanese violence and as we see in colombia or that is interreligious, across religious lines as we see in some other areas. if we use badlands, it will help us understand which of these many important suggestion have some opportunity to have some real impact and to be around 10 years from now on we could be talking about model success versus ones that are more

drive-by and? some of the long-term possibility for continuation to thank you. i will leave it there for a chance for discussion. [applause] >> you know, once again, yonan has produced a fantastic program. mary ann captured on everything. it is a shame that we've lumped everything in islam. the key to today, the rabbi made an interesting observation about how deeply religious many of the sire. in the same breath, he talked about tolerance. of course some people are so deeply religious, have so much faith in their own faith that they can't tolerate others. focusing on islam for a moment. the well known divisions of shia, sunni, sufism which is not

mentioned much, but let me just type briefly about the titles. they will position in combating terrorism and think the issue to live when you think of isis in particular is what is the connection between religious untrue religion in combating terrorism and causing it. this is no question. there is strange says islam which are very close in their emphasis on violence. they may be rotten scholars of the quran, but it seems to me if we wanted to focus this particular subject, it would be well advised to think about that. now of course the home of the wahhabi is one of our allies. i think this is probably something we haven't paid enough attention. a word about religion. we talk about religion as a sociological thing. i am a person of faith. when you talk about

sociologically at the macro level, it is a very micro theme. it is about our souls. our view as to how our souls will be saved. it seems to me that several of you have said how we underestimate the will of religion. we have to be honest and say we are fairly materialistic secular society and don't have a real deep wired instinct for religion or whatever people say to the contrary. we really have to get into the level of individuals and look at some of the greed and variety of islam. the concert they talk about prime minister and melody and hinduism in the maccabee, the crusaders, anybody. and you find some of this. what if you talk about what we're worried about, we've got to get down to define elements of it and that is my observation. thank you. >> okay. why don't we have one round of

panelists. if you want to respond on the issues, then we are going to open up for discussion. >> i just want to make sure that we are very clear and that i deliver my message. so what we are doing and what we have achieved during these 50 years is fundamentally make any difference in terms of our understanding of different religions. i told you that we started in 1963. something else happened the same year. several thousand bishops were congregating in the vatican and they made major changes. this is the catholic document where they decided finally that

christian, but if someone were the responsible party. and since then, it has become part in parcel of our understanding today and that the same time that document also recognizes muslims and jews as vegemite religionist believers. so that has shown that it's possible. within religion, to have thinking about certain issues than that happening. i can see that we have achieved that ourselves. for example, our basic issue is what about this blasphemy or what about apostasy. it is a very hard issue in the muslim world. but when they go to the koran, we don't see any description.

there should be no compulsion about religion. that is why in america their fathers were not muslim. so if that can happen here, that means the islamist commitment to freedom of religion is a blessing. whether we are in america, anywhere else. that cannot happen by itself. it is very critical that the experiment that is going on in america, the emergence of muslim community will convince. in the sense that will create a paradise of what muslims all over the world realize that this is closer to the understanding and interpretation of the quran. the website that we have on

these controversial issues i want to bring to your attention that there is so much material that has been produced and this is fully supported and profoundly religious. so like i have, for example, sharing the wealth come in for a muslim and jewish engagement. similarly we have a special issue here about muslim and baptist. several with american ambassadors, muslim and baptist. so there is a continuous, constant discussion and debate among the religious entities in america. religious scholars in america. so this is our gift to the rest of the world and we're proud of that.

>> out of a tear from the audience actually. >> okay, ratepayer. >> i am going first time to decide the very and start with this statement. [laughter] i appreciate very much this statement. as a scientist i realize that muslims in the united states and the world. so with all due respect for what muslims in america are doing, i don't think it's solely reflects the muslims of the world. i don't see here anybody who wants to kill in the name of

religion. and that is a good thing. but the point is we are here in the united states. what we heard here are very typical american types of responses. the question is how integral muslim world. i don't see any strong muslim community is this such in the world. in deed in those cases where they are trying the results of elections, the muslim extremists who on that happens in the case of the palestinians, that happened in the case of the egyptians and so on. i question what can we do or what can be done in the real majority muslim community to combat terrorism from within because no matter what we say is my friend here will speak, talk

is very cheap and when we talk it doesn't affect them. what can we do and how do we get the majority to act. it is not a majority. it happened in germany when the majority was wholly at the beginning, not supporting didn't help. it happened in russia. ..

>> so much observation. to the point isis -- they take on the same word, islamic state. it is more than one time which is misleading for the children to be the case because islam i can say jewish terrorism because

all of these are lesions have nothing to do with religion. they have the vehicles concentrated and that none of them focused on education. it's very important, education. we should have taught religion the right way. good education can have a negative effect or positive effect. that's why we should start from kindergarten. you cannot start this at the graduate or undergraduate level. you should start from kindergarten and this is important because it is only education that brings the change

in attitude and behavior and nothing else. so the topic that i will drive will be in the title that everybody speaks about it because it is not religion. i can say that in my opinion it has nothing to do with the problem of terrorism. it motivates us to do something. it is the policies of some countries in the form of occupation. the injustices or a trust these committed by other people. it is these actions and behaviors that make and create violence and terrorism.

>> judaism, islam, christianity share many common key values. one of these values is that caused by man and not by god. instead of blaming religion we should the blame on politics on the social factors even within the framework of the international efforts to combat terrorism or violence. it's all the more imperative. again this conflict needs education again. this is one of the major causes of instability in the region by resolving this conflict. i suggest that it's very important and we should deny

those on the benefits. it's only through this achieving peace. when i was a young diplomat in london secretary terry said almost the same. this was in october just a few months ago. i said this many times and i quote him, he said as i went around and met with people in the region how to combat this coalition the truth is that

there was not a leader that i met with in the region who didn't raise spontaneously the need to trick you get peace between israel and the palestinians because it was a course of recruitment and anger and agitation that they had to respond to and people need to understand the connection of that and it had a something to do with humiliation, denial and absence of dignity in the opposite of all of the. i don't have to tell you that the koran is peaceful and islam is peaceful and other regions, but nobody has. i don't want them to tell me

that. no, go and give me some verses. i can quote you hundreds but if you allow me just one or two i can tell you and then i will go it was not in retaliation of berger, not of spreading mischief in the land. it would be as if he has killed all of mankind. both isis, what are they really, what work are they doing? anyway. again, whoever says this is in the koran. whoever saves the life of a patient has saved the life of

all of mankind. another, whoever kills intentionally, his reward is held where he shall remain forever and he had a tremendous punishment for him. also to the veto of the united states from the peace and stability from 2011 for the self-determination. on the united states they have the right to veto as is the only one. what do you expect? if you are under the occupation would well have been? i will leave it to you. thank you very much.

plus. "-close-quotes the mac we have some comments. >> is probably against my better judgment, but i just wanted to say that i really don't want to the u.s. and the culture that we have to come up likely. it isn't represented in america either. the people in the room i would venture are not representative of america. there's a huge voting bloc in the country that is identified in the christian right. we intend to see them in the cities but the minute that you get into the heartland, you're dealing with a traditional christianity and that voting bloc tends to be staunchly in favor of republican governments that have a very hawkish foreign

policy. one has to keep that in mind. i am not going to go out and say that christianity is is possible for all the problems in the world that i do think that as americans we have to be honest with ourselves that sector of the population is huge. the vote and put government in power and they tend to use the bombs in religious dialogue or diplomacy how much is spent by the government on weapons versus the kind of work many people are doing like tina? it is tiny for every dollar spent on diplomacy or weapons. when the united states institute of peace was threatened with being closed a number of years ago the budget was $42 million which was about the same amount of money that buys one fighter

jet. so, i think we have to look at ourselves. one of the reason we don't have the terrorists in the country killing muslims is because generally we are winning. we are in the position of power. we've been in the ascendant for a very long time. as muslim powers diminished and western power has increased. however i think we have plenty of examples they can become terrorists, too when their backs are against the wall and that separates what the ambassador has just said. in lebanon and other countries we have to keep that in mind and i just want to say i'm not decrying the military. you have to wage wars to defeat enemies. we are way out of whack when we use bombs and diplomacy. we have to invest resources in

the other side and come to terms with the fact the money that we are spending on the military is part of the problem. >> i would like to comment briefly. >> we have been discussing the issue of the world of religion and we talked about incidents of terrorism come and we talked about what's going on in pakistan and afghanistan and what's going on in nigeria and so many parts of the world. i must say i'm offended by the fact. none of the issues we have referred to have to deal with the cause and despite what secretary may have said, it is and isn't relevant to the issues we discussed today and they

should be discussing the role in combating terrorism and not just bringing iran will send political issues that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. [applause] >> on a footnote, as academics we have an obligation to study the conflict round of the world and those of us that believe in advancing the cause with justice we do what we can. i would like to call your attention to one publication and the reason why i'm calling your attention. the seminar on the palestinians and the issues and we had have the honor to invite the ambassador here to participate

and this is available to the people to find out not only one of you with many other views including it up on that. >> i will try to be brief. one of the cases i worked on and i directed the freedom in the house was the case of a young man it was fairly secular but a muslim and he was imprisoned in solitary confinement in egypt under the former government and for his views in the blog.

everybody thought he would get ten years. and we monitor the case and he wasn't tortured which would typically happen to the others like them. he was released before the revolution standing side-by-side with christians and in defense. he was trained by the islamic congress and many trainings that they do throughout the middle east and they are an excellent organization. so as far as the education and training that organization has been investing for many years. i would recommend looking at their work. when i worked in congress were able to secure funding for the

religious freedom programming and is the first of its kind of his $4 million. it was for promoting religious freedom in textbooks around the world and they did a study in israel and palestine and you can look into that research to see what they found that the same time the commission was doing a number of studies on the intolerance was in the textbooks in the middle east much of it promoted by saudi arabia but i wouldn't just saudi arabia i would look at the textbooks in turkey where the government controls religion. there needs to be more so you have to start at all levels of education but it takes as many of the panelists had said earlier looking at ourselves in our own countries.

the religious leaders need to be willing to say there are some problems in my society. they are looking to overcome them so that we don't allow them to grow intolerant towards others and lead to leave it to the point where they're out of control in the governments themselves to commit acts of terrorism against others. we partnered with the foundation and around the world in hundreds of schools they actually used a curriculum on the religious freedom that i wrote and the only countries that actually depend decline to use it.

they are concerned about how it might be received in the community so maybe that is a country that you can talk to and encouraged to look at the religious freedom and educational programming. >> anyone else on the panel? can you get the microphone? we would be able to hear all of the discussions. my question is through a muslim panelists. there is 1.8 billion muslims throughout the world and there's

the lead for a leader is that correct and if such a thing is so, how will he be recognized or how is he or she going to be able to. 1.8 billion. >> i nominate the doctor. >> that is a question that do you see such the need with a star qualification of it that would be a process of something like that that would choose the leader through the muslim family. >> [inaudible] >> we are in the 21st century.

they will recognize the job is institutionalization. we didn't have the hierarchy that's what's happening. they are in the last 50 or 60 years to the organization of the islamic conference. so that way they are able to access and prayer ties the needs of the different muslim countries and the 1.5 billion. so it is more on the institutionalization and not.

>> please identify yourself. >> i think i may be unwise to say anything. it seems to me that it serves as a selective security against honest examination of the data texts that they all have. only a member is able to interpret its own text and usually they will get give an apologetic interpretation and not really examine the data texts and try to clean them out. they've had more millennia to clean up and it's not done as good a job as a prickly. this may be a matter of time and other factors. i think the professor is correct in that and i think that they've

done a better job of printing that out not necessarily for the reasons the professor has given. all innocent and have to resort to violence defensively and to deny that their own violence which sometimes is defensive. one has to look at the actuality. the examinations i have seen are a disproportionate amount of extreme left-wing and islam it. there are plenty of others but those are disproportionate. now they claim to be the disproportionate victims and that's why they are responding but if you look at the reality they are the disproportionate commuters of violence and the

oprah servers seem to be the greater reality and those that are more aggressive are also more aggressive than others area that seems to be the reality. others may have a different perception but it seems it's important to examine what is real. >> we are talking about religion and at the same time we have to talk about the relationship and by that i meant the role before because of try to advance the interface relations and when the ambassador profits from the koran, and i'm not talking exactly about the idea that if you save one life it is to save

the entire world it is also one of the major principles in the christianity so we have a common ground. i would like to call your attention to the book that a general felt all of us and i hope you do pay close attention. we want to thank our distinguished panel and this was just an outstanding idea and you certainly made it all worthwhile and the idea you can't do so much in this world of ours trying to learn about other people of the beliefs in other

cultures and other ways of life and we can learn not just about the primary of the relationships we talked about today but really all of the religions and ideas whether it is an influence of any of the others we know about the primaries but there were were about other beliefs out there and in my lifetime and experience having had an opportunity to serve with the others, for example in india as long as the tours during the korean conflict ended the non- and a bunch of other things that i don't want to bore you with, i never meant met any atheists in battle and so certainly religious beliefs into that type of thing is very much alive today and in fact think that

this is. i think that all of the terrorist type ideas and so on are not part of religion. they are part of a separate belief. they may draw on religion and claim they are christians or jewish or hindu but that's not what you're all about and that's not what they are all about either. that is the good people and bigotry veterans. i can tell you this, too in terms of the defense budget for a 75 to 80% of the defense budget goes to pay people and that only a difference in the conflict not the weapons or bombs or anything else like that so before you take too much of a slice out of our budget, remember that as well.

they are celebrated our program turning 10-years-old. join us at seven eastern for a conversation on the conservative political pundit.

what are we going to make of then to make of the crisis before us? it's not a speeding asteroid but rather, it is us marching in mr. action in the most powerful way to do one thing, domesticate the planet. that is what is in this crisis as we speak today. what does it have that have to do with renewable energy? in the relationship with one another in the planet earth. it's the clarion call because it is loud and clear and sweet as all must be. it's about the problem for those to listen and i can imagine that with each passing, there is a though it has us marking the package of another america.

and it's certainly clear that provides the evidence, unequivocal evidence that something is amiss. there have been five events that raffle the crisis that we are in today. we don't want to miss beans. we understand that the crisis is human induced habitat degradation habitat loss come habitat modification of invasive species over exploitation come in over the last few decades, climate change. >> that is just a brief portion of tonight's program on the recent renewable energy summit. you can see the program at 8:00 eastern on the content and network c-span

democrats tend to get a little more upset at them and they've bought into the myth of the media and the media is on their side. whether it is republicans that firmly belief in the media so they kind of expect it's important for the post. i hope that over the last four

years, i've done enough back and forth and treated both parties with equal fervor that people have now come to say okay you are someone we can do business with. i know that the senate and to the pack is affiliated with. read. they stopped answering my questions midway through the campaign season. they were not getting a fair shake. a look at the constitution of congress speakers include the hudson institute distinguished fellow and former republican senator of oklahoma. they discussed the role of congress and how his actions compared to those of the president. they also talk about the

legislative priorities for the new congress in january. this is an hour and a half. >> i'm the senior fellow at hudson institute and i want to welcome those of you in the audience here at hudson and also welcomed the audience that c-span to what i think is going to be an absolutely fascinating and i would venture to say unique event that's taking that is taking place right now in the discussion about the present past and future of the u.s. congress. as almost all of you know at least in this room, the buzz has been in the last month and a

half has been about the prospect of the dominated congress coming in january. everybody that has an office in the town about what the gop congress should be doing. there are a couple of items that i would like to highlight that. it is difficult out whether the next congress does is as important as how and why it does it and what is involved to be in the same part of congress to be

the legislative branch in today's political cultural new you. it's in the history of the government and that was the election of franklin d-delta roosevelt. and with that, the decisive shift began under way of the power accruing to the executive branch from the other two competing branches which as you all know the legislative judicial and executive were seen by the founding fathers as a set of coordinating countervailing interests in terms of the discussions at the way in which the government in itself such as

the united states would take place. the power began to accrue to the executive branch. they had more information and a quick response time and the great depression and would therefore in a better position be to carry out the policies and opponents policies that would tend attend to the nation's welfare and also to its prosperity. that's power to the executive branch accelerated wear again the assumption was that the executive branch has the speed to respond to the international crisis such as the outbreak of the war and to deal with issues of maintaining america's

security and also helping to maintain peace around the world and in support of our allies. that process became twofold. there were some places that spoke out against us to drift to the executive branch. the political scientists who emphasized the 1950s importance of the legislative branch and as a naval crime in the united states. but by and large. it's not only inevitable but desirable. as you look at the kind of figures to talk about the

american politics figures discussing james mcgregor and all of the focus was on what the executive branch was able to do in the debate which to expand its power. it was found as a way to enhance the will of the executive branch and its powers and eventualities as a part of the american system the time may have come at the end of the obama administration to think the shifting balance within the united states government. one of the steps that are necessary, if not necessary to reverse it, too reassert the

power of the branches and the legislative branch and that is what we are going to be talking about here today. and that person the person that put his cards on the table with an exception in this regard as my colleague and distinguished fellow at the hudson institute. now as far as i know from this biography he's never worked in congress. it's his only surviving thread. they are working for the republican lighthouses and then during his years as an american enterprise institute is probably the leading expert on regulation on the regulatory reform and the

way in which it has encroached upon aspects of the african culture and american society in ways that the government is not entirely desirable and what to do about that. it is in the branch agencies my colleague asks why is this happening and part of the answer was what the congress ought to be doing and isn't. what is restoring the constitutional congress and about what my colleague has to say about that particular topic.

>> let me start by saying those that were coming to the christmas party are in the lobby. you can just go back down. thank you for that interesting introduction and i am particularly gratified that the senator was one of the ablest legislators of the modern era and came to town in 1982 discuss some of these issues after the 113th congress has adjourned. last month, the republicans won the solid majorities in both houses of congress. they've gotten themselves into a terrible fix.

it's the constitutional powers that have hobbled its ability to exercise effective checks and balances. it will be accumulated in the tremendous autonomous power as a result ended under the management of the left liberal press and determined to exercise the powers. it is also a constitutional problem for all of us. my essay but constitutional congress was published shortly before. it was in the early writing on the constitutional one. i've documented the wholesale delegation of its taxing and

spending, borrowing and lawmaking and in the executive branch and viewed with alarm the growing concentration of power in a single branch and the single individual but it occurred to me that a tie-in of the fully divided government when one party controlled the congress article one and one party controlled the executive article number two, it might provide some opening for an institutional reboot. to paraphrase james madison, the partisan interest of the congressional majority might be connected to the constitutional rights of the place. so, when it appeared that we might be in the time of the divided government i set my time to thinking about how that connection might be accomplished and i came up with a five-part plan for the congress shall

restoration. they are very popular for dieting, making a resume can other earnest endeavors, so i thought that this might draw attention to my ideas. there is a fundamental difficulty here that has to be acknowledged and emphasized. of the modern age has not been kind to the representative legislature. this idea that we should be governed by elected representatives of local districts who gather together to make the wall that we live our lives by by hammering out compromises among the differing competing and conflicting interests and values was an original embodiment [inaudible]

we're you naturally constrained by what economists call high transaction costs. when the travel and communications were slow and costly, which legislative sessions for were critical occasions to learn the development in other sections of the nation to take other leaders friend and fellow to forge from the hometown crowd. in the political organizing was costly the interest groups were few and broad-based and the demand of government were general. when law enforcement and program administration were costly, the executive branch could do only a few things. and in that world, representative legislation was not been back but it was at

least manageable. in the modern age, the high influence in high-technology have disrupted all of those traditional functions. they need to find out what is happening in the country to form the positions on the national political questions or to plot with their peers. although those this can be done instantly in the lower cost through the media and direct communications. we now have thousands of very well organized and very well-heeled lobby groups devoted to every imaginable cause and the ability to monitor, report and sanctioned individual legislators as reduced space through legislative deliberation and compromise and it has created new opportunities among the politicians for championing national rather than local

interests. it is overwhelmed with this latest capacities to the disciplines of the old committee system in december a system and the cost of administration have been powered the executive branch as its natural advantages over the legislature with hierarchy, specialization, the ability to multiply functions indefinitely. in the 18th and 19th century, lawmaking was legislative. it was custom made in the early 20th century of the new deal if became an industrial age executive lawmaking. it was information age executive

lawmaking. the basic congressional adaptation has been to delegate to the executive agencies. the congress sets a very broad sits very broad goals, legislators are in favor of clean air, against discriminating against the handicapped and the authority for actually achieving the goal is given to the agency with broad discretion to pursue those worthy goals through various regulatory procedures. the individual member, senator, representative and in place of the age old give and take of collective legislating adopt a new business model database is about influencing the decisions of this growing executive penis on behalf of local, national constituency groups. the committee leadership structure is supplanted by the party leadership structure devoted to supporting or opposing the incumbent president whatever he may do.

it collapses under the weight of a thousand worthy and unworthy causes. if you want to know anything about four in five you have to read the article. it is for the congress to reclaim its authorities for taxing, appropriating and borrowing that it has has abdicated the executive branch in recent years. this would be done as soon as possible and hundred 14th convenes and would be a matter of constitutional housekeeping renovation. there is no content about the spending levels in the policies

are the powers and in the matters in which the administration and the republican congress will be sharply divided and in that matter when they were presented for the delegate signature you would see the clear choice of whether or not to prevent the congress from reclaiming the dead powers and exercise them as the constitution provides. that formulation i think to some seemed a little prissy when it was first advanced but i'm happy to say that it's intense practicality became apparent almost immediately when president obama made his long advertised highly controversial changes to immigration policies by executive order. republicans opposed to the action saying the next day or

now they would stop it to the appropriations of the u.s. customs and immigration services but then there was another interest apology. sorry. we just discovered we had realized this. it is completely financed by its own fees so there is nothing that we can do about it. the legislation that was finally passed last weekend extended appropriations for the 2015 fiscal year with the exception with this eis resides which has to be reappropriated in february -- new congress. but the fact remains this eis

doesn't need congressional appropriations until the statute granting it is rescinded. and if that recession is done as the part that keeps the policies it is going to veto it into the political controversy will be about the substance of the immigration policies rather than the central constitutional point. i want to note one more thing about this controversy. the customs and immigration service gained its financial independence as part of the homeland security act of 2002 which was passed at the president bush's instance in the wake of the 9/11 tourist attacks. an important part of the delegation story going back over the decades is that extraordinary powers are delegated from congress to the executive in the face of the

emergencies that require fast action and continue to rest in the executive branch when normal times return. the broad lesson is the crisis and urgency favor the executive. and favor the legislature. that is the essential reason the congress needs to reclaim the many financial powers and the constitutional powers it is given up. it's in the crisis provoking battles over migration policy. in the debacle in the last debt ceiling crisis in the fall of 2013 bits to the treasury to pay

its bills untold this coming march. the power needs to be claimed as part of an on the door and asked where the congress is simply declaring its readiness to resume the routine exercise of its constitutional responsibilities. the exercise of the powers is always going to involve difficult questions of political tactics and strategies and the republicans are not going to win all of them by any means but at least the congress will have a fighting chance. it doesn't have a fighting chance today. step number two is to reinstate the spending power. this is both the least controversial of an abstract matter of the proposals also the most private -- pragmatic.

it is the source of the widespread contempt and ridicule view shared by many people in the congress itself into virtually every number of congress will tell you that resuming their regular budget and appropriate would be a splendid idea. and speaker boehner and senator mcconnell have both titled to set things straight as soon as they get back to town in january. this was not require legislation. the president signature isn't part of it. all they would have to do is resumed their own procedures for annual budgeting and appropriations procedures that get established in the congressional budget act of 1974 but that have almost completely ignored now for several decades. but adhering to the discipline of the budget and passing 12 regular appropriation bills by the end of each summer would

require a radical change in the congressional structure and culture in the adaptation congress made it to the modern politics. the committee chairman especially the taxing appropriating and budgeting committees have cleared away the obstacles to spend growth and the multiplicity of interest group and individual members are under constant pressure to exceed two. it was dramatically illustrated in the past week and in the humiliation of the finance at the hands of his party leadership. the annual continuing resolution replacing the appropriation bills in which the entire

government is funded for the period of time by one single bill has created a new power structure at the level of the party leadership that has played has pleaded strongly to the advantages of the executive branch because it results in one big annual process. i worked in the reagan administration administration for several years and when i was there, the congress frequently, routinely interfered with excellent and well thought out policy initiatives that we were pursuing into a regulation antitrust and other areas through the writers through the omb, the treasury department and the justice department and other agencies. we have other writers to see if we can work around them. if we couldn't, we would move on to other mistress.

we always took them seriously and they were routine. they have an awful time. if all of them had been have been rolled up into one annual crisis where ronald reagan could have his rhetorical skills in competition with a few much less known salons on capitol hill, that would have been the envy -- dandy for us. the policies and the hierarchy. when the committee chairman have strong powers unto themselves and are no longer the party leadership's. it will require real earnings to the actual art of collective choice where we have to come to a decision among ourselves in compromise with people sometimes very different and conflicting

views. the third step and then i will wind up is to own delegate the lawmaking power from the regulatory agencies. this is a problem not so much of culture as the sheer capacity because it has created a lawmaking machinery capable in the volume vastly beyond what could be done in the bicameral legislature consisting of the committees with all sorts of cumbersome procedures thrown in for good measure by the constitution itself. the most direct proposal is the republican idea that has floated for the last couple of years and passed the republican house twice. the bill would say that the major regulations in the exit to give branch could not take effect until they were approved

by both houses of congress and signed by the president which would be a foregone conclusion as a real bill and it would enjoy privileges contest track privileges to come to an up or down vote by each of the two chambers such as we do in the trade agreements and database closing exercises. that would mean that they would simply be legislative proposals. it takes the slow-moving complicated process and it just fit right into the middle of this high-volume regulatory machine that we have built. it is on delegation and the extreme and a lot of people are very much for it and it's going to be interesting to see. it was an anti-obama measure the congress can actually pass such a thing.

we will see if they really want to do it. it would mean ten, 20, maybe more highly complicated legislation added automatically to the legislative calendar every year and arriving with privileges at a time and place of the presidents choosing. it's with some regulatory decisions under obamacare and other things where republican feelings run high. it will not be signed by the president unless he finds himself in a fix as the decision both on the federal health subsidies to the federal health insurance exchanges in the summer.