nal thing that is a federal function. we appreciate the input. they sit in on the alaska -- the arctic policy group, and that will continue. how do we more formally involve system i know craig fleener is coming up, the new governor's representative for the arctic and we'll continue to engage as much as we can. >> thank you. in the middle. >> from from the polish embassy. just a question. as far as cooperation with russia, can you explain something more? you said you had to fight for the talks there so if you could say something more and just along this line isn't the increased military activity russian military activity -- making this not possible at all in the second question if you

could expand on the ice breakers. what is your opinion, what is development should be? there was a news the other day about possible international cooperation in u.s. have -- having u.s. icebreaking capability and what's the minimum level the u.s. should have. thank you. >> okay. russia. one of those things the united states is deeply appreciative of is that the other arctic countries have stood shoulder to shoulder together in terms of their opposition to the lawful incurrings in the ukraine and russia's violation of ukraine's sovereignty.

they have all adopted the sanctions and support the sanctions, and we as a one triare grateful. one thing we're analysis agreement on is the seven other arctic countries, united states and the other six minus russia all believe that we should for the good of the arctic for the environment, and other important issues, we need to keep russia in the fold and keep communication open. we are all committed to that. i have relayed the message that the military rhetoric, the actions by the russians in ukraine, are not helpful to keeping that line of communication open, yet we remain committed to doing that. i think, and i know secretary -- this is secretary kerry's belief and the president's belief-and it's something i just understand

intuitively, is no situation is made better by cutting off communications. it's very important for us to communicate, not just for those thing wes want to do in the arctic but also to help other situations as well. so, we are committed to maintaining that line of communication, at least as it stands right now. military buildup, i don't know whether you were touching on military buildup in the arctic. clearly there's been a lot of let thick as well. -- a lot of rhetoric there as well. i was told by one russian when i said the rhetoric was unhelpful, they said well, military people are going to be military people and say what they're going to say. i'm trying very hard to make sure either through our intelligence programs or otherwise, to find where the reality is in terms of capabilities. one person can look at what is going on in terms of what they call military buildup and rightfully say they have an awful long border along the

arctic, i and if you have increased maritime traffic, you should have search and rescue facilities, you should have modern airports and other things things i loo like to see built in alaska. so one person's search and rescue response capabilities is another person's military buildup. i saw at least a couple of news stories when i was appointed appointed into the job that said the united states wasn't going to militarize the arctic because they selected an admiral as their representative. i'm not doing a very good job if that's why i was selected. it's hard to determine intent. intent is always a gamble. you need too look at capability. what are they actually building? we're keeping an eye on that. some of it is rightful legitimate things that should be built because it is an increased

in maritime traffic. they're building icebreakers. were we were building icebreakers lated week's hearing, snorted cantwell asked about the various -- senator cantwell ask the about the tieds. calmed for three u.s. heavy icebreak end and one called for four and six. i can't keep track of the numbers. what i told senator cantwell we get up a wrapped up talking about how many we should have. it would seem to me we could at least come to agreement on we need at least one and start building it. i would be happy just to see us get a first icebreaker much less all the other things. so in the absence of that there are people coming forward. some commercial activities that would say, we'll build you an icebreaker and lease it back to the government. there are other countries that might volunteer. part of the arctic council, what

we might work at -- and i think as we work forward in search and rescue, for instance we want to take that search and rescue agreement and exercise it now because no one country can provide all the resources that are necessary to take care of a major maritime disaster. so let's inventory what we have and see how we might work together better to be able to share responsibilities and share responses. maybe all those icebreakers out there -- maybe there's a way for us to cooperate between countries. i hate to go down this line of logic, but i watch fantasy the "star trek" movies, and you see on the bridge of the enterprise you see a russian, an asian, an african-american whatever might be countries came together, pooled their resources and worked together. wouldn't it be beautiful if within the auspices of the arctic council we could pool resources and work together

cooperatively? i think that's worthy goal but the united states, at the end of the day, has to do its part as well and start investing in resources there. i'm hopeful the president's new executive order, the responsibilities of the arctic executive steering committee will start setting priorities and start pushing resources. >> we had a gentleman right -- lady over there -- >> hello, i hamlin da, partner doing federal relations and ethics and compliance at a law firm here in washington, dc i'm also the secretary of the american chamber of commerce and for 14 year is was deputy general council in the white house office of drug policy. i was interested in your comment about the federal advisory commission act the federal government of the government in the sunshine act. i presume your comment expressed

a concern -- correct me if i'm wrong -- about the u.s. participation in the u.s. economic council convert that u.s.a. federal advisory commission. is that the concern you were raising. >> that would be the concern. i i'm not an expert on the laws but it has been expressed as a concern as we talk to people in the state department. >> that's right. a legitimate concern. but i note with the president's new executive order on interagency coordination there's no position or representation there few nonfederal interests. i understand that as well as far as enter agency although die have an idea hugh to dress that but regard regardless. my question to you is in light of the very first question, there is a desire for people to have infountain the federal policymaking process who are not already in the loop the insiders, whether that includes oklahoma or other areas as well

do you foresee the creation of an actual federal advisory commission for u.s. arctic policy being created to address that need? >> i have to admit right up front i have not even considered it or thought about it. and i'm not going to use it as an excuse. i think i've been in the job seven months now and there's -- while i had a very narrow and parochial interest as the commandant of the coast guard i have had to broaden that the international portion of this, and that has consumed an awful lot of what limited brain space i have. so getting into other finer details, how to refine this that's a worthy suggestion for consideration. we'll make a note of that. certainly i could foresee it as a possibility but i just don't know. >> on the side there. >> ely with science magazine.

admiral, the arctic is one of the most important places in the world in terms of climate change, one of though most volatile regions. and yet it's very poorly instrumented for climate. i note in your remarks you didn't mention this issue. how important is it that the nations of the world improve monitoring in the arctic and what do you think the arctic council should do about that? >> the -- it is in fact a part of our u.s. program. we're looking at various mapping systems, censors. we're looking at inventorying what other countries are doing and bringing them together so we can have better observation. there's great need for increased satellite coverage whether it's communications observation,

navigation, most of what we have put up over the decades is optimized for the middle lat tattoos, not for the higher latitudes. so that's another thing that clearly the united states can't take on all by itself. there's benefits to all the countries operating in the arctic so that's another area we're hopeful we can bring people together and start investing in. but you are absolutely right. we need better coordination of what sensors there are up there and we'll attempt to identify those that are needed as well and start moving towards getting them resourced. >> thank you for holding this event, i'm claire with national journal. you talked about the need to kind of raise public awareness. it seems like one of the big challenges with the arctic is getting adequate funding and

resources and convincing congress, but also kind of convincing the american public, which night lead to more attention from congress. can you talk a little bit more about how you can get the public to pay attention and i also wanted to ask if you heard anything back from disney about your offer to them to perhaps use the "frozen" characters as a way to educate the public. >> i'm frame my name isn't very good at disney. for those who don't know -- i don't know how you couldn't -- actually, when you good home tonight, google half disney arctic, and last time i checked there is at least ten pages of articles there. one of the proposals we had was a very bright young lady in my office, a big fan of disney the movie "frozen," i think she can recite the entire script of the movie and sing all the songs.

but she suggested that we need to start teaching the youth about the arctic and perhaps have something public service announcements done with the disney characters from the movie "frozen." anna and elsa and sven and olaf itch know because i have granddaughters and i watch the movie all the time. when i arrived in norway it just so happened they were in the middle of their film festival, and on that particular evening there was an outdoor theater, there were 300 children all bundled up and watching disney's "frozen." so i tell the story to the crowd at the -- at the next morning, the 1300 people, and i mentioned i had gone out to disney in los angeles to meet with them and i didn't think by marketing through very well and i said you know you have taught all these kid around the world about a fantasy arctic city in norway.

a city that doesn't exist and conditions that don't exist. you need to start teaching them about the plight of the polar bear and alaskan villages falling into the ocean abuse of the permanent ma frost -- permanent ma frost i thawing and this guy was becoming more andmer concerned and he said, admiral, our culture here at disney is to project positive images and happy things. hoe is right. how do you-than into the find something happy endings for the arctic? that can be done and we're continuing discussions with disney. it's a very good company and they put out a good product, and i like to have them help us raise awareness. your baseic question is how to rates the bareness in the american people. if had the secret i wouldn't be

working for the government. i would be a lobbyist -- i'll never be a lobbyist but i'd be running a media business or something. it's hard to get band gil twit. -- bandwidth. look at the front page of the pose pose and look at things drawing the attention of the american people, and yes, long term we're becoming concerned about what is happening in the arctic either because of climate change and other things but it's slow. and there's no major cataclysmic event that is happening. and when you have so many cataclysmic events drawing your attention after day, it's hard to get the bandwidth to spread it out. it's like we say why isn't the white house taking this up? well the white house has got a lot on its plate. secretary kerry is going to be the chair of the arctic council, but you think he has the time

devote to the arctic council on a day-to-day basis with dealing with ebola syria isis, and everything else in the world? there's a -- something that goes along with leadership and that's you have a lot on your plate. the united states is fortunately oar unfortunately involved in a an awful lot of things around the world. therefore the arctic isn't a huge problem so it's hard to draw attention. hive been trying to do how to couple with the national imperative, something that will draw in the american people, and we are still struggling but we're getting closer. >> yes, sir. >> thank you. richard ranger from the american petroleum institute. the lady's question prompts a suggestion for you to consider and that is through some resource associated with the u.s. chairmanship, a recommended reading list something you

could develop over time with the state of alaska, with academia. a lot of greet books are out there, very lopez, arctic dreams, the "50 miles from tomorrow." i think from the standpoint of the long pull, building student interest, academic interest public interest, i throw that out as a suggestion that could be developed over your tenure. >> and that is part of our public diplomats program. we're using the fulbright scholarships to gain some interest and start bringing people in. that's why i -- one of the reasons why i was really keen on trying to get disney in there. you have to start with the youth. like anything else when you're looking -- one of the challenges we faced in my previous job was getting the best of american talent diverse mental talent into the coast guard academy and you can't start at the junior year of high school.

you have to start marketing when they're in grade school. and we need to carry over some of these programs and perhaps introduce it in our schools or otherwise. you're absolutely right. >> admiral, in the very near future there's one cruise line that has plans to send a ship carrying as many as 2,000 people into the arctic waters. do we as a nation have the ability, if we believe this is fool hardy, to regulate this kind of activity and not allow ships that aren't truly seaworthy in arctic conditions to proceed into our arctic regions? >> we have the ability -- this is win of those things as -- when i was in the command adapt i would bring in my lawyers and -- commandant i would bring in my lawyers and start looking at this. if a voyage is manifestly unsafe you can terminate a

voyage yes. if it's an american flag vessel. so that can be done. will it be done in this particular case? i'm sure they're going to demonstrate they have the capability i'm sure the united states coast guard and other agencies in the government are going to take a good, solid look at this and say okay, if a problem happens, how do you rescue those people? i personally have been involved with a cruise ship that broke down and the only way to rescue all the people was to bring another cruise ship alongside and transfer the -- in that case i think -- so many years ago -- i think 800 people and you had to transfer 800 people by ferry across to the other cruise ship. do you require them to have another cruise ship come behind them in their wake? do you require them to have an icebreaker escort? there's a lot of things that canada and the us are the united states are looking at and

will place as requirements. at the end of the day i'm sure the united states and canada will deploy resources and have them on standby and those are resources that might otherwise be used for other things. if you are going to do some new task you have to pull them off other tasks. you might have to send ships up there that would be down interdicting drugs and illegal migrants and send them up there to make sure that you can provide for the safety of those 2,000 people that are transiting the northwest passage. >> identity like you all to join me in thanking the admiral for a very interesting presentation. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> we'll have more road to the white house. rand paul will be talking about overhauling the criminal justice statement. -- estimate. we'll have live coverage at 1:00 eastern on c-span. later in the evening, former florida governor jeb bush will be in dover, new hampshire, at the home of the former state republican chairman. >> a number of senate democrats said their pulling their support from a bipartisan antihuman

trafficking measure because of an abortion-related provision in the bill. we'll have some of that debate shortly. we'll also hear senator majority leader mitch mcconnell and minority leader harry reid talk bat letter sent to iran by senate republicans. >> the justice for victims of trafficking act is one of the most bipartisan pieces of legislation you could possibly imagine. ever since this bipartisan human rights bill was introduced by a democrat and a republican in january, and made publicly available for any person to read members of both parties have sung its praises repeatedly. this bipartisan bill has gained the support of 13 democratic cosponsors, recently democrats voltsed unanimously to approve it in committee. this week democrats consent it unanimously to advance it on the floor. even the democratic leader himself said he underscored, appreciated and agreed with my call to pass this bipartisan

bill overwhelmingly. i doubt there will be problems on my side he said. if there are, we'll work to clear them. that was monday. by tuesday democrats steamed be threatening to filibuster human rights legislation for abused and neglected victims and children. let me repeat that. democrats nor threatening to filibuster human rights legislation for abused and neglect it victims and children. so why? democrats now say they don't like language that has been in the bill since it was introduced months ago, and does nothing more than re-affirm the bipartisan law of the land. while that language does. and this bipartisan provision was on page 4 of this modest sized bill. so democrats obviously enough it was there to begin with. democrats obviously wouldn't have kyi sponsored the bill and voted for it in committee or call for its passage of the

floor if that it hadn't read the bill first. these democrats suretily don't want to see more quotes liking this one from an official with the coalition against trafficking and women. here's what she said. senate democrats are choosing a phantom problem a phantom problem, over real victims. so if these democrats keep their word to the victims of human trafficking, then a bipartisan filibuster attempt will fail. if these dem carrots keep their word then this bill will -- this senate will pass a bipartisan human rights bill. if these democrats truly are having second thoughts about supporting such important human rights legislation, they're free tougher an amendment. let's not filibuster bipartisan help for vulnerable victims just to make point are left wing special interest groups. our democratic friend laugh to

resist the siren song of their pollsters who tell them the path to victory lies in turning bipartisan bills into perform erred fights over cultural issues. americans are looking for statesmen and stateswomen on the democratic side so stand up stand up and help us emancipate the victims of modern slavery not score another empty political point. so, i'm calling on these democrats to help us do that. help is almost there. for the vulnerable victims of these awful, awful crimes. truly no left wing special interest group is more important than fighting modern-day slavery. fresh so the democratic cosponsors and declared supporters of the bill need to keep working with us in a bipartisan way to ensure that help comes.

>> mr. president. >> democratic leader. >> a story that i think is worth talking about par of it at least this morning. here's what it says. newspaper editorial around the country have not been kind to senate republicans this week. the collective seriously has emerged in reaction tee open letter that 47 republicans penned which seemed deep dee signed to undercut the nuclear talks with the obama administration. here's some things they said. a blot on the 114th u.s. snap, detroit free press. another one senators signed this letter should be ashamed says saad the pittsburgh post gazette. some sounded embarrassed. another quote, cringe-worthy buffoonly on then global stage. others seem worried about capitol hill's different function. quote, has congress gone contracts?

wondered a career journalist in kentucky? nor mark kirk of illinois, quote, has not been among the crazies in congress but he joined them here. noting her signature endorsing letter the concord monitor -- new hampshire -- the republican senator kelly ayotte it's not every day that the united states senator attempts to undermine u.s. foreign policy and weaken the nation in one cursive sweep in phoenix, arizona, the arizona republic republic board concluded the republican senators are equicktively edie claireing the congressional right to conduct subversive important foreign pollsive with the great to blow up agreements negotiated as weapons of choice. mr. president, on another subject. in the last congress legislation combating human trafficking was a bipartisan matter. senators klobuchar, leahy, long

leaders on this issue but this year and we can talk about how it got in the bill -- many believe it was a slight of hand -- sleight of hand but it's in the bill. an abortion provision in this bill before the body for more than 25 years i had the pressure of serving with henry hyde in the house of representatives who is famous because he has penned the hyde language which deal with abortion. all of these 25 plus yearses that matter has been put over a year at a time. now, we've never chosen to make that permanent law. this year republicans have south to injection in this bill one of the most controversial issues over the last 40 years. a woman's right to choose. and don't take my word for it. leading republicans acknowledge that abortion politics -- gentlemen senator john cornyn said quote, this bill is being

hijacked and used to debate something it doesn't have anything to do about and that is the subject of abortion. ... orrin hatch said -- quote -- "i can't believe the senate has become so political that we would raise that issue at this time on this bill." the solution is so simple. take the abortion language out of the bill. the bill dealing with human trafficking is going to pass. if we don't do it now we'll do it. it's something that is imperative that we get done. but it should not be dealt with in relation to abortion. take the abortion language out of the bill. republican senators have a choice to legislate or hijack the debate. they want to get something done; they just need to take abortion politics out of this bill. they want to leave abortion politics in the bill, the republicans will only continue this session's record of dysfunction. now, mr. president, this is the second day that my friend, the republican leader, has come to the floor and quoted something i

said a few days ago. every word that he quotes is perfect. that's what i said. but here's the context in which i s mr. president this is the second day that my friends the republican leader has come to the floor and quoted something i said a few days ago. everywhere that he quotes is perfect. that is what i said but here's the context in which i said it. i'm an expert on motions to proceed. during the last six years i have had to file cloture as the leader here hundreds and hundreds of times. in the last congress more than 200 times. virtually all of the closures were filed because republicans wouldn't let us get on a bill or they simply wouldn't let us get on a bill come even builds they favored. we have to spend a couple of days getting it right for a vote on cloture and once i was done and we had to wait 30 hours