♪ >> in a moment we'll go live to nasa headquarters for a briefing on the new horizons spacecraft which will go past pluto today. asked..

deals also among the tradition of american leadership. it's now more than 15 years since president kennedy said let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to negotiate. he was speaking to the need for discussion between united dates in the soviet union which could last for to restrict the nuclear weapons feared in those days the risk was a catastrophic nuclear war between two superpowers. the risk is nuclear weapons will spread to more and more countries particularly in the middle east, the most volatile region in our world.

today, because america negotiated from a position of strength in principle, they stop the spread of the weapons in the region. because of this deal the international community will be able to verify the islamic republic of iran will not develop a new air weapon. this deal mid-february out of line when we achieve a framework earlier this spring. every pathway to nuclear weapon is cut off an inspection and transparency regime necessary to verify the object is moby put in place. because of the deal iran will not produce the highly enriched ukrainian weapons grade plutonium that formed the law material because of the deal iran will remove two thirds of its installed centrifuges to produce highly enriched uranium for a bomb and store them under

constant international supervision. iran will not use to this attribution is to produce enriched uranium for the next decade. and then we'll get rid of 90% of it stockpile of enriched uranium. iran has a start though that can produce 10. the stockpile will be reduced to a fraction of what would be required for a single weapon. the stockpile limitation the last 15 years. because of this deal iran will modify the core of its reactor cell that will not produce weapons grade plutonium and has agreed to shift the fuel from the reactor out of the country for the lifetime of the reactor for at least the next 15 years iran will not build any new heavy water there is. because of the deal we will for

the first time be in a position to verify all of these commitments. that means the deal is not built on trust. it is built on verification. inspect% 20 for seven access to a risky nuclear facilities. iran will have access to the entire nuclear supply chain conversion facilities and centrifuge manufacturing and storage facilities. this ensures iran will not divert materials from known facilities to covert ones. some of these measures will be in place for 25 years. because of the deal inspectors full access in a suspicious location. the simply the organization responsible the iaea will have access for necessary when kerry appeared that arrangement at in the iaea has also reached the

act designates complete investigation and the military dimension of iran has nuclear research. finally iran is prohibited from pursuing a nuclear weapon under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which provided the basis for the international community efforts to apply pressure on iraq. is there and take to implement the deal it will receive relief from sanctions in place because of iran's nuclear program. both america's own sanctions imposed by the security council. iran must complete key nuclear steps before it gets to receive new sanctions relief and over the course of the next decade, iran must abide before sanctions are lifted including fighters for restrictions related to arms in eight years related to ballistic missiles.

all of us will be memorialized in endorsing a new u.n. security council resolution and if iran violates the deal all the sanctions will into place. there's a clear incentive than real consequences for violation. that is the deal. it has the full backing of the international community. congress will now have an opportunity to review the details in my administration will provide extensive restraints on how this'll move forward. as the american people in congress review the deal will be important to consider the alternative. consider what happens in a world without the deal. without this deal there is no scenario where the world joins us in sanctioning iran until it completely dismantled the nuclear program. nothing we know about the arena government suggests it would capitulate under that pressure

in the world would not support an effort to permanently sanction iran into submission. but the sanctions in place to get a diplomatic resolution and that is what we done. without this deal there'd be no agreed-upon limitations for there've been nuclear program. iran could reduce operated customer centrifuges. iran could build reactor capable of producing plutonium for bombs and we would not have any inspections that allow us to detect a covert nuclear weapons program. in other words no deal means no lasting constraints on iran's nuclear program. such a scenario would make it more likely other countries in the region would feel compelled to pursue their own nuclear programs threatening nuclear arms race in the most volatile region of the world. it would present the united states with fewer options from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

i've been president and commander-in-chief for six years now. time and again i face decisions about whether or not to use military force. the gravest decision any president has to make. many times in multiple countries have decided to use force. i will never hesitate to do so when international security interests. i strongly believe our national security interests now depends upon preventing iran from obtaining nuclear weapons which means about a diplomatic resolution either i or a future u.s. president would face a decision about whether to allow iran to obtain a nuclear weapon or whether to use military to stop it. put simply, no deal means a greater chance of more war in the middle east.

moreover, we give nothing up by testing whether the problem can be solved peacefully. if iran violates the deal the same options available today will be available to any u.s. president in the future and i've no doubt 10 or 15 years another person who holds this office will be in a far stronger position with iran further away from the weapon and with the inspections and transparency that allow us to monitor the uranium program. for this reason i believe would be responsible to walk away from this deal. but i'm such a tough issue is important the american people and representatives in congress get a full opportunity to review the deal. after all, details matter. we've had the finest nuclear scientists in the world working through details and we are dealing with a country that has been a sworn i'd are scary of

the united states for over 35 years. i welcome the robust debate in congress on this issue and i welcome scrutiny of the details of this movement. i will remind congress that you don't make deals like this with your friends. we negotiated arms control with the soviet union when the nation was committed to our destruction and those agreements ultimately made us safer. i'm confident the deal will make the national security interest of the united states and our allies. i will veto any legislation that prevents successful implementation of this deal. we do not have to accept an inevitable spiral into conflict. we certainly shouldn't seek it. precisely because stakes are so high this is not the time for politics or posturing. tough talk from washington does not solve problems.

hard-nosed diplomacy, leadership that is united the world as a nation -- that doesn't mean the doesn't mean padilla will resolve resolve all of our differences with iran. we share concerns expressed by many friends in the middle east including israel and the gulf states about iran's corporate terrorism in use of proxies to destabilize the region. that is why we are taking the steps because in iran would be far more destabilizing and far more dangerous to our friends into the world. meanwhile, in the maintainer of sanctions for terrorism, ballistic missile program in human rights violations. we will continue her unprecedented efforts to strengthen security, efforts beyond what any of mr. shinn has done before and will continue to

work at camp david to elevate partnership with the gulf states to strengthen their capabilities to counter threats from iran a terrorist groups like isil. however i believe we must continue to test whether or not this region which has known so much suffering, so much bloodshed can move in a different direction. time and again i've made clear to the iranian people that will always be open to engagement on the basis of mutual interest and mutual respect. differences are real and the difficult history between our nations cannot be ignored. but it is possible to and rigid ideology a foreign policy based on threats to attack neighbors or eradicate israel a different path, one of tolerance for the peaceful resolution of conflict leads to more integration into the global economy, more

engagement with the international community and the ability of the arabian people to prosper and thrive. the deal offers an opportunity to move in a new direction. we have come a long way to reach this point. decades of an iranian nuclear program many years of sanctions and many of intense negotiation. today i want to thank the members of congress from both parties who helped us put in place the sanctions proven so effective as well as the other countries who joined us in the effort. i want to thank negotiating partners the united kingdom france germany, russia china isolate the european union for unity in the effort which showed the world can do remarkable things peacefully addressing topics. we showed we can do when we do not split apart.

finally i want to thank the american negotiating team. we had a team of experts working for several weeks including our secretary of energy and i want to particularly thank john kerry, secretary of state who began his service to this country more than four decades ago when they put on the uniform and went off to work. history shows that america must not leave not just that there might, but with their principles it shows we are stronger not what we are a blonde but when they the world together. today's announcement marks one more chapter in pursuit of a safer and more helpful more hopeful world. thank you. god bless you and god bless the united states of america.

>> there is reaction to the nuclear deal of credit for members of congress is senator bob corker of tennessee who chairs the senate foreign relations committee said he wants to read the agreement detail and fully understand it but he says i begin from the place of deep skepticism that the deal made the goal of preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. senator ben cardin ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee said it's in america's national security interest that iran is blocked from ever having a nuclear weapon. we go now live to nasa headquarters for the spacecraft sweeping past pluto today and is just getting under way. [cheers and applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen pluto has never seen before. three, two one. [cheers and applause] and now remarks from dr. john grenz spelled. >> it's been an incredible voyage. many of you the last few days have been participating. what it all comes down to is an enormous team of people led by alan stern, principal investigator on the debate team at johns hopkins university applied physics lab university of colorado, the list goes on and on. hundreds of scientists

engineers technicians people are selling blankets to prepare the wonderful intrepid explorer the first to visit pluto and fly beyond into the kuiper belt. true exploration. so glad you're here to participate in the period this disappeared. that view is just the first of many many rewards that the team will get especially since pluto didn't turn out to be a relatively featureless planet with nitrogen foggy atmosphere and we are scratching our heads thinking okay, what are we going to do with that. pluto has turned out to be an extraordinary complex and interesting world. that was never a certainty, but now for the very first time we know that and went back for his first impression i would like to turn it over to alan stern.

[applause] >> well, i want to thank john for his remarks and thank nasa for making this all possible. how about that? [applause] 50 years ago today the united states is embarking at the beginning of an era of exploration of the solar system double of forever. 50 years ago the spacecraft flew by mars and i think it's sitting on the 50th anniversary we complete the initial reconnaissance with the exploration of pluto. a big team of people worked 15 years to do this. they worked under the gun for time. they broke records for low cost outer planet exploration.

they did some amazing feats and we saw one last weekend in terms of the mission operation rescue that produces images just like the one you saw him anymore raining for the ground beginning tomorrow. stay tuned because her spacecraft is not in communication with the earth. reprogram it to spend its time taken important data sets that can only take today. over the next period of 12 or 13 hours the spacecraft will continue to take that data and transmit a message back to the earth for 20 minute at 9:00 p.m. eastern time and which will find out how it's doing, whether he survived the passage in the pluto system and hopefully it did and we are counting on that. there's drama because it is true exploration. new horizons is flying into the unknown and tomorrow morning we

should see the beginning of a 16 month data waterfall. you will see more and more about pluto beginning tomorrow. if we can put the image up which is now the best image that the resolution of four kilometers per pixel which is approximately 1000 times better than we could do with the biggest and baddest telescope, the hubble space telescope 3 billion miles away at birth. new-paragraph instead of the image yesterday downlink to the ground. the image flew at the speed of light for four and half hours in the nasa deep space network transmitted here. the image was a him this morning. how about a round of applause for that dutiful planet. [applause]

now i would like to invite her mission operations manager, alice bowman. up to this stage. dr. bowman has been leading this from the time we wrote the proposal to ban this project all the way through development through launch and through the thick 3 billion-mile journey across the solar planet. alice. [applause] >> what an absolute honor it is to be here, to be standing here and waiting for those closest approach damages to come down. i can't say enough about how thankful i am that nasa is addressed to build and operate the applied physics laboratory. we have a large team and i just

happen to be the mission operations manager but in no way am i taking credit for this incredible journey. it is definitely a team effort. we depend upon each other to each do our part to be the experts in a field. when i stand back as morning and i think, i have to pinch myself. look what we accomplished. it's truly amazing that humankind can ask or this world and to see pluto being revealed just before our eyes is just fantastic. i can't wait until we get these images down starting early tomorrow morning and of course the signal tonight that tells us the spacecraft is healthy and

has recorded the fantastic data. thank you again very much. [applause] >> it's been a great morning and obviously the story is not over yet new issue more about what will happen this evening. before we open up for questions i want to talk to alan. we have video sent to happen this morning with the science team i believe. >> john and i were at the building here on the campus for the science team is working. besides team assembled at 5:45 this evening to see the best image of pluto and react to it and have a scientific discussion. i think will give you a peek into it if we can? it up.

[cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] >> a little behind the scenes look. it's not behind the scenes anymore. you've seen it on the screen and it's going far around the world on facebook and mr. graham and every other social media as well. we are happy to be here to answer your questions as representatives of this big team and representatives of nasa. >> congratulations. we will open up for questions. social media, the numbers are astounding. the world, ladies and gentlemen are just totally excited.

the story is not over yet. what will it do here is raise your hand. we'll start with you, go to social media and get as many questions in as possible. raise them high. last time i stayed over here so let me start out with joe. give your name and affiliation. tell us about pluto. either mountains for craters. tell us what you see. >> that make you the image backup. -- this image is oriented with pluto's north to the top. the dark region ucr in europe pluto's equator. the planet is about 1500 miles across to give you a scale. it's got a fan or verified net nitrogen atmosphere which you can't see because it is clear just like looking through other tenders atmospheres.

what you can't see and it's possible for the folks behind the scenes to make a larger fraction of the screen you'll built to see it. you can see regions of various brightness very stark regions. each crater. broad intermediate salad over the pole. what we know is on the surface we see the history of impact. we see a history of surface activity in terms of features we may need to identify a set tonic indicating internal activity at some point or maybe even in its pricing. what we also know as this is clearly a world where geology and atmosphere climatology play a role because pluto has strong cycles. it snows on the surface. they go back into the atmosphere

. there's a been observed to move around on the surfacing from 3 billion miles away. we look at the image and frankly if you're a scientist like im you want want to see supporting data. you want to see the topography so we can determine what is high and low. you want to see the different composition units. you want to see the composition spectroscopy to determine what the different areas are made from. you want to see the thermal maps that are the brightest tears, coldest areas where the snow has plated out or some other story. by tomorrow we will have imagery better still.

a lot more data coming down and we couldn't be happier and their future. >> and blalock to wallow with the planetary society. i notice there's also color information. tell me about the color data and any evidence for clouds or anything happening you can see in the images. >> sure absolutely. can we put up the collar? there's another image and looking for. if they don't have that i'm not able to show it to you. the monitor is a little hard for me to see. pluto has color variations across the surface. when we stretch those, we will have a better handle on how strong the variations are and we

expect to show you some later in the day. i've looked at the image briefly when we were first in the science work area and i was looking for evidence of plans, atmospheric cases and i couldn't be then. that doesn't mean they are not there. a proper analysis of that will require time and maybe higher resolution imagery. treat your high, miriam kramer with nashville. this is exciting for everybody am sure. i'm wondering specifically for alice, how are you feeling right now knowing your craft is out there flying by the pluto system and you won't hear from it for a while. >> that's a really good question. i haven't had area much sleep. [laughter] we always talk about it being

titled a baby teenager. we lost signal last night at 11:17 and there is nothing anybody on the operations team could do but to trust we had prepared it well on its journey on its own and do what it needed to do. yet there are a lot of less in the center even though we did the spacecraft wasn't going to be talking to us. we were there. we wanted to be with it as it went through this journey. i'm feeling a little bit nervous just like you do when you set your child off. i have absolute confidence that it will do what it needs to do and they will turn around and send us the data and tell us it's okay. it's a mix of feelings of

nervous and proud at the same time. >> before you ask a question and give your name and affiliation, please raise your hand. >> sase severance, "star trek" radio. i've a question from one of our list nurse. how long can your horizons transmit before the power expires? >> i will take a crack at that. you horizons is powered by a rpg. that stands for radio isotype demo electric generator. the same that other deep space missions that fly too far from the sun for solar race to work that is that we all use from a technology nasa and department of energy. the actual power source is the element plutonium, which by the way was named for the planet pluto and the 1930s. so they sent plutonium that

could pluto. the plutonium produces heat and thermocouples -- when they launched new horizons with 250 watts. that declines every year as plutonium decays. currently producing 202 watts to power the spacecraft. every year, three less want a massive decline, we would get to a point where we can't operate the primary computer communication system. we've estimated the point will be reached sometime in the mid- 2030s roughly 20 years from now. at that point the spacecraft will be 100 astronomical units from the sun. over the next 20 years of the spacecraft continues to be healthy if it operates to return scientific data, a flyby

at the building blocks of planets like pluto and would've the chance to go further to explore the deep reaches like voyager did and do that with modern, sensitive instruments aboard the spacecraft and hopefully return data that will add to the storehouse of what we know about our environment in the solar system and potentially cross the interstellar boundary simple inner sellers base. >> the gentlemen here. before you ask your question i would get as many media as they can. hulk me out here and just ask one question. don't try to stick a follow-up then. these folks are be available throughout the day for one-on-one interviews. >> john wentworth, popular mechanics. just wondering how the data will be prioritized.

is such a slow connection coming back from pluto. how has it been asserted to be prioritized as it comes back in the next few months? >> that is a nuanced story. let me start by saying the next couple -- the next couple weeks the spacecraft will be sending the highest priority data back to the ground. beginning the first of august will transition to a mode where it sending low-speed data sets to the ground. that come into the ground of the lower speed that they were taken and recorded. those are easier to plan for and we chose this to come to the ground to give alice and her team a much-needed rake from a six-month historic encounter of seven days of round-the-clock operations. we wanted to give them a break and that's why we send low-speed

to the ground in august and september and then they will crank it back up in the plan for that in a couple weeks. we equate with nasa on one tenneco which were first priority, second priority in third parity. initially we would send the data down as a data set compressed onboard the spacecraft by a factor of several so we can get it down more quickly and then went back safely on the ground we will send everything a second time in uncompressed manner. the entire process will take it. a 16 months. they expect to finish the last of the data transmit in october or november of next year. >> what is the actual data rate? it's much too high. >> we wish it was 56 k.

we colored race stepping. as the base cuts higher in the sky, the ground increases in elevation and following the space task to increase the data space. the 10-degree elevation brought about a thousand bits per second. now when we transition into a spin note we can get higher grades. at the top of that, the max data rate is about 4000 bits per second. >> will it take to questions about a social media which no surprises exploding with excitement. one question with social media and then i will come over here. go ahead. >> and kramer for the northeast astronomy in new york where you will be next year when you have

about our data. we are very excited to be here and cumbersome day. the question is about sharon versus pluto. looks like the images released a day or so ago with a lot of chasms and craters in the image you showed here shows one crater. is that real? do you see a lot less craters and why would that be such a difference? >> i think you make an observation that it looks very different. now we can see how dramatically different they really are. to my eye images show a much younger surface on pluto and the older and more battles surface on sharon as we can put numbers by counting the craters in the function of their size to impact models and hope it will

establish the ages of different units on pluto as to why pluto looks so much younger. either through internal engine continues to run and they ask is taking place or the atmospheric processes are themselves covering up the geology and covering up the craters. we will be able to know that when we get the higher resolution data and compositional data and the other data set is mentioned. but the various data sets that can read the whole story and it's ambiguous today for a couple reasons. one that got the data and second we don't have supporting data to unravel the whole story. >> let's take a couple questions from social media. two questions that are reoccurring. i'm hearing a lot of buzz in

there. >> thank you, appreciate it. all the great questions online at desperate first question is does any of the surface features on pluto suggests possible tectonics? >> i am not sure. that is an honest answer. they have to have a little time to work with the data look at it carefully on computer versus seeing it on the screen and the science analysis area for a few seconds. we will have a chance to do that today. by the time the experts take a look we can report back to you tomorrow but the first analysis. >> mass encouraging stem. one of the younger fans from jessica lucas. by 9-year-old son wants to know how long did it take to build the new horizons?

>> new horizons was built for years and two months. that includes the design phase as well as testing from nasa until the time we launched. either way pretty sure for outer planet missions in general. we were under the gun to make the jupiter gravity launch window in early 2006 and we were able to do that. as a result we were able to make the encounter today. had we not made the launch window we would've had to fly another four years and not encounter pluto until 2019. we were very well aware that we were designing and building horizon that there is a big incentive to make the launch window in the hopkins applied physics laboratory team those of us on nine flicks out this

research responsible for payload development. everybody knew it was very important and a lot of people sacrificed family time night and weekends. other people didn't think it could be done but the team managed to do it and they deserve a huge amount of credit. they not only built the spacecraft and got it launched in the unbelievably short time but it has worked essentially flawlessly for the whole 9.5 years. >> obviously a bouquet to to all the questions. we'll take a few more here and then we have to wrap a period >> what is the maximum resolution you hope to get from the pictures you take and the probably shadowed areas? >> that's a little bit of a difficult question to answer. it depends on the subtleties of the data analysis. first for those who don't know

what the question is about beyond pluto when it looks back it is seen the thin crescent. we actually arranged a flyby to occur on the day with the largest moon if i can represent pluto the largest moon is on the other side and it is illuminating the terrain. i look back with their cameras on them in a dead and we can see said mr. raines. however, we look back in the glare of the sun and the sunlight creates various optimal effects on the images that can make it difficult to see the details. the native resolution is pretty good. because it is so dark the noise is below and we have to actually

add them together in a way that reduces resolution until we build up the signals well enough we can pick out individual surface unit. how far we have to degrade the resolution is difficult to predict because they've never turned the cameras back to look at the sun. we didn't want to risk that. so we'll have to see what the obstacle affects our and see how well we can produce high resolution imagery. >> lapd with sky and telescope. the scientists have been worried with the lab's pluto might have frozen out and you are eager to get there. you mentioned yesterday you've seen data for nitrogen and methane. is it fair to say that it snows on pluto? >> it sure looks that way.

>> we are going to wrap up here. >> could you tell us about the developing of the data you got down last night? or the memory chips fill enough for example? >> well, last night we downlink laura mentioned what you saw on the screen here. we did monitor how the solid-state recorder was doing and it actually had filled up a couple of segments we have segmented since the last contact we had it was starting to fill up that recorder. one of the things we will do tonight is get another look at how much data is recorded at a good measure on board the

spacecraft. >> leo ingres with average television. i just started broadcasting so i hope the question has americanized. as the large-scale picture we've been looking at here i see my colleagues maybe five six different terrains regions, is that roughly right in the future that appears to be slightly different than the left side of the right side. i'm wondering if that ineffective except solar point in our difference up in the future. >> we are seeing the same name as you are leo. a handful of individual problems across the hemisphere and we are seeing a bit of a left right dichotomy. but we get color data and other data sets will be able to say more definitive things about

that. i think you're making the right conclusion. >> robert froman was collective space.com. can you describe what exactly you'll see on the monitors when the signal comes in. what is the hello earth day day you will beginning and what will pop up first? >> what will show up on the screen first. >> when you established a handshake between the ground station or the deep space antenna the first thing we try to lock his carriers and that will tell us that this bases there. the next thing we unlock our sandals and her beau which is the truth. we know the space gadget trends

may space gadget transmitting at the expected data rate hasn't switched to some other state arrays. that is what we will see. one thing here is. in our database on the ground was not the sequins to stay out of block or log. we will see those words appear on the screen and then will start to get real-time data from the spacecraft data and the data consist of the most critical point from all the top systems on board the spacecraft. since there's not enough room to send everything down at one time, there's a cycle that telemetry cable will go through. first you might see points devoted to the main computer status menu makes the point devoted to guidance and control. we don't know exactly where in

the rotation of and so we'll just have to wait and watch the cycle. we should have enough time to cycle through enough times. >> for quick questions. i have to ask the question when we will see color data. >> with color data on the ground right now. besides team has been working with that and i believe will show you some of that later today when we get back to you. >> ramp on the donald for the canadian broadcasting corporation. that was also the most dangerous time for spacecraft. if anything was going to go bronchi with it. how much science do you have that this point? >> i don't think we will lose the spacecraft. we've estimated based upon a

variety of different experts making numerical models of how much dust and debris might be in the system, the probability and we set up limit on the possibility around to card in 10000. you could drive hundreds of horizons through the system and expect all of them. a very low probability, but we always caution we are flying into the unknown. we have been transmitting data to the ground the last few days. the so-called failsafe data sent and the concept is identical to the concepts used in the apollo mission as soon as the mission commander would step and say a few words for his jury they would immediately collect the first sample called the

contingency sample in case something went wrong and they had to terminate the rest of the space blog to come back and leave so they have a little fun guaranteed. that is what we've been doing. we designed this about four years ago so we went through and looked at the data set collected on final approach and selected for each primary mission is some samples of the data like the wonderful energy just saw adult is some color data, compositional spectroscopy looking at the surface as the atmospheres and particles in plasma data also hit the ground. they've obviously revolutionized our knowledge about pluto and satellites already. however excited to you 99% of the data is still in the base cost and the most important of his in that. it would be a great

disappointment if new horizons have been lost. i think the spacecraft is just fine to see it at 9:00 tonight. [inaudible] >> based on the information must i had to readjust a diameter of pluto, how exactly did new horizons, to be approached this morning do you think? >> well, that is the navigation question. i can count you that we were 72 seconds early for hitting the aim point. alan, do you know what the distance wise? the plan was 7750 miles. >> the very latest determination

indicated would be somewhere in the vicinity of 70 kilometers than the precise aim point still inside the target box the target window. we did fly through it, a little bit off-center but well within the spectrum. >> hey everybody. dan leone. i suppose a question for alan. when can we go back to pluto? [laughter] [applause] >> had been secretly working on a lander. i had a pretty good bet someone would ask me a question about that. >> have you really? >> i think it is so scientifically interesting that we want to put in orbit for a lander mission. a mission like for to knowledge

you to do particularly not take 40 years to get there because you need the troubles only but ultimately come to a stop. there are some preliminary concepts on how to do missions that stirs we need to see the data come to the ground analyzed the because we don't know the right questions to ask them the right instruments to put on a lander or orbiter. i think it's a little premature. we want to see new kinds of powerful instruments they are. first the right thing to do this really analyzed data on the ground and then come to the question down the road. >> okay, we have to close out here.

i will remind him he gave the celts and others will be available throughout the day for interviews in the newsroom. i will talk it over with dr. graham's love for closing remarks. >> i think you've got a little better sense of this great adventure science way around. we have a long day before we get to the phone home signal. i won't mention because i've been watching this. you can see the deep space network signal will be able to see when the deep space network is looking and follow her story because we will keep you informed when new horizons phones home. throughout the day we have a series of panels will be able to hear scientists talking about their first impressions. you've heard from the press here on your first impressions.

we all have to admit it's incredible we are getting our first use of pluto and the pluto system in this high resolution. i can guarantee with as much certainty as anyone can but the best is yet to come from images later today being worked on and all of her fingers and toes crossed of the great images horizon is taken right now over the next days, weeks and months. that is only part of it. what we've seen already from pluto is a complex interesting world. right now orbiting the dwarf planet we found it's really interesting. you've all been following curiosity. a lot of discussion. as mars relatively straightforward or complex than

they give us a glimpse of how curiosity has shown as mars is very complex it will world much likely to earn his described orbiting or is trying to tell her story which is even more complex. the atmosphere is tough to understand and of course life on earth forever change the atmosphere in geology. we are just scratching the surface and there's of course much, much more. juno will arrive faster as jupiter. next year will launch mars the cyberthreat commission to an asteroid and bring samples back. this is the most incredible time for planetary science and i think it is just stating that you were all here showing the great interest for this incredible achievement the caps-on event never condescend. congratulations alice.

congratulations, alan. i hope you communicate a lot to your subscribers and readers because this is an incredible journey. this is true exploration. i am thrilled to be here. >> social media following not twitter, facebook, youtube and others the conversation astounding. all the information you heard today and will be hearing in the weeks months years www.nasa.gov/new horizons. ladies and gentlemen, the space program has written a new chat during science and exploration. thanks for joining us. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> presidential candidate rick santorum sat down with reporters at an event hosted by the "christian science monitor." topics included immigration comes same-sex marriage in iran. this road to the white house event is an hour. [inaudible conversations]

.. now onto the over so compelling

ground rules. as always we are on the record. please no live blogging or tweeting. no filing of any kind while the breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what our guest says. there is no embargo when the session ends. to help you curb without urge we will e-mail several pictures of the session to all reporters here as soon as the breakfast and. as the attendees know if you'd like to ask the question pleased to their traditional thing and send a subtle nonthreatening signal and i will call on as many reporters as we can in the time we have this morning. we will start off the carcass the opportunity to make opening comments that didn't go to questions from around the table. thanks again for doing this. >> thank you. thank you all for coming. i appreciate. look for to questions. actually not but i'll do my best, right? i would just say that i think this is someone who ran four years ago this is a very

different election. and jimmy one of the much more satisfying election as a candidate because this is an election ally from my perspective in the republican primary four years ago the election was about who was the conservative alternative and that romney. so the entire justification as a candidate was sort of establishing yourself as a foil for what seemed to be the establishment. for the nomination. this is a race that's a wide open race and it's an opportunity to go out and talk about the important things that confront this country from the important issues that confront this country and what your vision is and why you believe you are the best person to be able to tackle the problems that america is facing right now. in that respect it's a more

interesting race for me as a candidate because it's a race about issues, i raised about not who your opponent is that when you look at most of my comments it's certainly in the last few months i don't really talk about the other folks in the race. to meet its not relevant. there's so many faces out there that paying any attention to anyone is, i don't think businesses are important from the standpoint of your electoral success. i just don't think it's relevant. what the voters are trying to figure out right now is who is on my list that i don't think they are looking for any help from the candidates trying to take people off the list. i think they're looking to see what candidates are our potential viable presidential candidate going forward.

i look at that as a real opportunity to make the case as to why we are the candidate that is has the right solution for the country right now and has the best possibility of success in the general election. actually been the focal point of our campaign so far. we will continue to be. that's exciting for me because it's about how we can help the country, but we can do to make things better for the people who are struggling in this country and why winning is not as important as winning something that's worth winning. so it's not just about winning the election but it's waiting for this country in a way that we haven't seen in my opinion in several collections. i'm excited about the message we're delivering to us why i

announced from a factory floor and western pennsylvania because i believe that message, look at the people in america today who were not succeeding, looking at a very large hole in the middle of this country that needs to be filled with policies and values that are going to make america a much more top to bottom successful country going forward. and i think we have some very unique ideas in that regard that separate us out from the back and that's why when i travel around the country we do a lot of manufacturing events. we will be in iowa poverty 19 out of the next 33 days will be in iowa and we will be doing a manufacturing event almost every single one of those days we are there because pat toomey is one of the big keys that open make america stronger top to bottom, making things, creating jobs and opportunities for people who are not succeeding through a

resurgence in the sector of the economy. on the other side we have a national security which has become a really important issue in this election which was not at all important for years ago. and again we believe that our message is different. we have experienced almost no one else in the field has added track record that certain distinguishes also from hillary clinton but also the experience to be able to run up against a hillary clinton. i think that's an important part of this raise, is how can what i going to do for america but also how do you juxtapose that with a likely democratic nominee. on a lot of fronts we match up very well because we have matched up well in the past. we have, i think i'm the only person in the field who has real experience having gone to to to with the clinton machine and hillary clinton specifically when i was in the united states

senate. so i think it's experience that i think there's a lot of people believe that experience is to maybe more important than what we once thought it was. i think that recommends me to the electorate as time goes on. i'd be happy to stop there. >> let me ask you about fund-raising. nation of jeff bush has raise an enormous amount of money 114 million and the estimates are that cruz raised and allies raised 51, and rubio 45. cruz's folks say that you don't need to be the most well-funded but that you need to have the money to go up against jeb bush. he said -- does not need to made -- we are a well-funded conservative candidate and we are the only one or can you give

us an update on what you have raised and your folks have raised and what your response is to the arguments from folks like cruz's staff that you need to be the best funded conservative to have a place at the table? >> i was looking at this for years ago. four years ago we raised less than $2 million we started raising money april 1 of 2011 and we raised less than $2 million heading into iowa. and we won the iowa caucuses. after that point we raised about $20 million i think you go back and look at look at the campaign itself, how fund-raising was going, we were at times raising romney. romney whistle laying off staff because they were not in some respects even keeping up with us with the fund-raising base we had. i would make the argument that

money is important but what is money for? money is to get you votes. ends of the most important thing is how effective are you in getting votes that you need to be able to win the election? and clearly four years ago you know we ran a race with being outspent four five to one and were still able common primary 51 because of the super pak situation. i don't think this time around you'll see that same type of dynamic. four years ago we had and establishment case that everyone back and including the vast madrid super pak donors. i just don't think that there is that candidate. i understand jeb bush has raised a lot of money but there's a lot of other money out there on the sidelines that i think is willing and able and will

support a conservative candidate as that conservatives candidate emerges in february, march of next year. so i think the question is how much money do you need to win iowa and be competitive after that? it's not nearly the money that is being talked about right now. >> i know she didn't give us a number. you want to give us the numbers because we will report the number at the appropriate time. >> i try. let me ask you one other fox news has said to be on stage at the debate in cleveland just a place in the top 10 as you know. the average five most recent national polls conducted by major national recognize organizations an analysis by cnn's polling director recently released has you 11th. obviously not a helpful thing. how damaging is that to you to

overtake other conservatives in the field who are likely to be there, ben carson, mike huckabee, ted cruz what's the strategy to get you on the state of? >> again, i don't really pay a whole lot of attention to things that go on this far ahead of an actual vote. go back four years ago and we finished fourth in the iowa straw poll. most people would've thought that was not a particularly good thing to have happened. it turned out not to be particularly relevant at all. and so a lot of things have happened six, seven months before an election, sam beckett the time but in the end to turn out to be very consequential. i think there are pluses and minuses of the way that fox has set up a debate. cnn has set up their debate. we will participate in whatever their blackbox way of

determining what polls at what point in time. i think i've been very, very vocal about this. i think to the national media play such an important role early in the primary to determine who the quote top tier are and who is not is undermining -- is undermining the process that was established by the rnc to let states and voters make that call as opposed to the national media. particularly using a yardstick that historically has had no relationship to the actual every of these primaries are going to be which is national polls seven months before the election. i wish my people wanted to present a national polls two weeks before the iowa caucus said i was at 4% when i won the

iowa caucuses. and so given that a benchmark i wouldn't have been included if they're going to eliminate two-thirds of the people in the debate prior to the iowa caucuses. i wouldn't have been included and yet i was on the way to winning the caucuses. so to me it's on this character by the rnc to agree to something like that. having said that we will play by the rules. out of the card game plan hasn't changed much. we will probably do a little bit more television and radio this month than we otherwise would have i think as he told i'm going to spend 20 of the next come or 19 at the next 33 days in iowa. my game plan that really hasn't changed much. we're going to continue to work and make sure we win the iowa caucuses. one of the things i do know from four years ago, people in iowa don't pay attention what goes on washington, d.c.

they decide for themselves. >> thank you. cbs, first question. [inaudible] >> i'm sorry. lowder. [inaudible] >> because he is the democratic party. he is their base. ease the hard left. hillary clinton is moving to the hard left because that's what the democratic party has become an activist as well as their donors. they are the party of the left. it's not a far cry to say the party of the left would be very welcoming to someone who is a self-identified socialist. >> we're going to go to the "washington post"." >> obviously your messaging has been around nation should issues. you are still talking about

cultural issues, abortion and same-sex marriage. du worry that will alienate -- [inaudible] that you need any general election of? >> i'm a conservative across the board who speaks on all the issues, national security economic to moral cultural issues and i don't see them as -- to me they folded together to give you don't have a strong family structure in america, i've said this many, many times. as the american family breaks down the ability to limited government becomes less and less popular. when the government has to fill in for the problems that come with the breakdown of the family and in those communities, then the idea of economic and conservatives in the republican party that all we want to talk about or even members of the public, we need to focus on, i think is if you look at every

study that's been done by the left and right and i'll talk about on the campaign trail, i talk about the two books i've been on the campaign trail which is charles ries book and -- if you read both of those books. every study done at income inequality in the last soviets have pointed to the same thing. the principal reason income inequality is as intractable problem as it is today is first and foremost the breakdown of the family. so you can say you still talk about those things. i talk about those things because they're relevant to the debate on how we get a more vibrant middle american how we create better opportunities for children to be successful. i think it's important to understand that none of these things are sort of issues of himself, they all interrelate. interrelate. national security to get rid of a vibrant middle of america the

desire of america to engage in the world is you saw this during the recession, these are republicans sort of pulling back saying we can't afford to do this anymore we have to cut the military. that became, even within the republican party. why? because people were hurting. and people are hurting at home the last thing they want to do is a well we need to be going off and doing all these things around the world. all of these things interrelate, and to me the foundational element is to make sure we have strong families are we a strong families that are together and raising children get i think it was putnam who said it's more important for parents to read to the children the first four years of life than it is to pay for four years of college. i don't think that message is out there, that the message from either party about how important

this public policy issue is, of knitting the american family. >> nicole from roll call. [inaudible] >> well, obviously i talk about the importance of targeting voters who have been left behind by this economy in the last 10 years. and so i announced on the factory floor. you look at wages have been stagnant. median income has declined in the last seven years, and part of that is the recession but it hasn't recovered. and juicy stagnation that has really made this a much more

important issue that i think republicans have been and continue, many, not all, many continue to ignore the peril. i think this idea of laying out a vision for how pro-growth economics can translate into improved job opportunities for the 74% of americans age 25-65 who don't have a college degree and we will provide a pathway for a more stable optimistic future for them. that is an issue that was not as clearly as important 10 years ago as it is today, and going forward because the prospects to look a lot brighter. so i think the focus on that for me, it's nothing you do if you look at my track record when i was in the senate we were very interested in these issues, but it's now become more front and center. obviously, the cultural issues

big changes in the culture in the last 10 years but to me it's just a continuation of what we are seeing from the past 30 years. we've seen a continual breakup of the understanding of marriage and family, and it didn't start with the current marriage debate. it starred a long, long time ago. it started 40, 50 years ago. we've seen the impact of that with ever-increasing out of wedlock birthrates ever-increasing absentee fathers, ever-increasing levels of poverty. and that you be putnam's book it's pretty jarring when you read that book to see the changes in communities and opportunities are available for young people growing up in broken families and import communities. there just isn't a network of support. so all of those things are big cultural shifts that require the republican party to begin to address them. i think we are stuck the

republican part is stuck. i wrote this book called blue collar conservative and one of the chapters of the book is a chapters in a rising tide of lives all boats, and let your boat as a whole into. i think republicans still use the rising tide is all boats which oddly enough is the john f. kennedy line, and we don't recognize that there are people who say that tide has risen and i am in deeper water and i am bailing faster. i'm feeling like i'm sinking as the tide is going up. we have to have specific policies oriented towards our god help those who are sinking. and we don't. we still talk in macroeconomic terms. we still are unwilling to carve out public policy that addresses particular microeconomic categories or people. because that's tinkering with, it's not a purist.

i would just make the argument that they strategy on economics. from my perspective if we're going to win this election and if they're going to create a win for the american public who are hurting we have to have a different message than what we've been saying for the past 20 years. >> we will go next to john with bbc. >> senator, do you welcome the spotlight which is then shown on immigration by donald trump? >> i welcome the spotlight. theabout in which he has done his donald trump, not rick santorum. there will be a differentiation between the way we talk about this issue and the substance of what we talk about. i saw donald over the weekend talking about how he wants more and easier legal immigration.

he wants more people coming a wants it easier for people to come in. i have a very different approach to that. so while i think it's important he's focused the issue of immigration what you did with this important particularly for the workers i been talking about, you know, i sit in my announcement we have seen 35 million people come to this country in the last 20 years. that's over 10% of the population of this country have come to this country combined legal and illegal to live here. we have more people living in this country who were not born at any time in history of our country. we are approaching the highest percentage of folks not born in this country living here. that can all be good. that's not necessarily bad let me put it that way. we have to analyze what the impact is on the very people i was just talk about. what the effect on those who are struggling the most in america. and to do that is not

xenophobic. it's simply a rational policy discussion that we should be able to have in this country without being called various names that are not particularly appetizing in the public. i always refer back to the last immigration commission that was constituted under president clinton that was run by barbara jordan of immigration policy is first and foremost in the national interest. we need to have a discussion of what's in a national interest. certainly a part of that is out american workers are doing under this system that i think the argument that when you look at flat line wages now for the 74% of american workers who don't have a college degree, look at their wages, income over the last 20 years during this period of record, record immigration are not even close to any 20 year period. that includes the great wave. so i think it's rational and

responsible for public policy discussion as to what the impact is on the people who are most affected, right? i would make the argument that the people most affected are those workers a talk about after not doing well. we have an obligation to take a step back and say what is in the best interest of the american workers, by the way both nativeborn and those who came into this country legally over the last 20 years and before that. and see what policy going forward let us those issues. and that's why i suggested, not just what most republicans talk about, which is border security and tracking are these overstays and talking about e-verify and the importance of e-verify. but what we're going to do about illegal immigration and particularly the large amount of

unskilled labor that would bring in this country legally to compete i use this number again age 25-65. you look at since 2000 their been about 6.5 million net new jobs created in this country. what percentage of the net new jobs are held by people who are in this country or not born in this country? and the answer is all of them. there are fewer nativeborn americans working today than there was in the year 2000. and there's 17 million more native americans in the workforce, and so you can make the argument that immigration is a good thing for america but if you look at stagnant wages, look at the fact that immigrants primary have taken all the net new jobs and what impact is on those wages and benefits, i think it's pretty clear what's happening. and so to suggest as i have that we had to make some changes to

that, i think it's simply a topic that needs to be front and center and talk about. i think most americans would like to have this conversation without being made to feel by many that there are some anti-immigrant. but i don't think your anti-immigrant if, as i've suggested, still are after the proposals that i've laid out their edited a couple of months ago, called for 25% reduction illegal immigrants in this country. who is to be the highest level we've ever been prior to his 20 year period. >> we will go to herb jackson from the bergen record. >> i have a transportation question. the tunnel that amtrak uses under the hudson river is over 100 years. the existing car tunnels and bridges are at capacity so they'll have a major impact in the northeast but congress so far has not addressed this.

if you were president would you support building a new total? >> i think the approach on the transportation the federal government should do less not more on transportation. in fact, i have supported proposals that would dramatically reduce the gas tax and put the federal government back in the position of simply doing what we should be doing which is dealing with interstate commerce and movement which of course, includes movement of people from interstate capacity and it doesn't us from interstate from the classic definition. it could be as highways and other things that major interstate movers of goods and people. and we reduce the gas tax to the level that can maintain and in fact, improve the system and then tap the attacks al-qaeda has in the rest back to basically cut it and let the states do with all the other

issues that are more local in nature. we have not traditionally obviously with passenger trains, we support amtrak very generously over the years but as you know the federal government has traditionally not gotten involved with rail construction. certainly freight rail construction they have stayed away from that we've done some passenger rail construction. i guess my gut reaction would be that getting involved with a project like that would be one of those great areas that i would look at because it is interstate movement, but it would have a high bar in order to cross to do that kind of project. >> jonathan from the hill. >> santa to come you set said at the outset this is in some ways a more satisfying campaign for you but is it also frustrating

at all? it doesn't appear a lot of debates within 2012 transferred in support in 2016. is it frustrating to be in some ways starting from scratch and fighting to make the debate stage? >> i will remind everybody prior to the iowa caucuses we were at two or 4% are a lot of support that we got was late and it was after looking at all the candidates. they made the decision. i certainly know about iowa. asacol, and talking to our supporters if we're getting a fair number of them to say yes we are still with us which is pretty encouraging. but a lot of them are saying we really like you but as i said there's a lot of new models on the show room, and we are taking a look at everybody. i'm not surprised that at all. there are a lot of new models and as i said publicly, a lot of good people out there that people are going to take a look

at. i've always felt confident that four years ago i felt this way when i was starting from scratch. i feel very much the same way this time in spite of all the new models. i think this model is a pretty good reliable model that people come back to and say you know what, all the glitter is not gold. i use the example of donald trump anybody, trump is best on immigration and then you read well actually he may be tough on the border, but on a lot of other immigration issues he's not very good he's not considered a conservative on those things. that just takes time and one of my concerns that the complaint about this at the time, the lack of debates means that really most americans, most primary voters have no idea where most candidates stand on the issues. they just don't. it's all just i always wish

these national surveys would start without saying who are you going to vote for a list of the candidates. to say who are you going to vote for? just you know or can you name all the candidates running for president? i guarantee you that most people couldn't name more than two or three candidates, and so it's just all these questions are not relevant. because it is so early and people are not paying that much attention. and clearly in iowa what i do know about i am is they make the decision in the last month or so. that's not to say they will not be for someone today but as i found out, just because they are for someone to take doesn't mean they will be voting for someone later on. i would rather not be their favorite one. i would rather be there figure one that matters. >> thank you, senator two-part question on the supreme court. going back when you're in the senate knowing everything that

we know now would you vote for john verse? [inaudible] -- john roberts. >> knowing what i know now and what i confirm -- what i confirm john roberts? look, i confirm john roberts because he had a good strong track record of someone who paid attention to what the constitution said and followed it. everyone is entitled to a mystic every now and then editing he's made one mistake twice. that's disappointing but he's also written a lot of really good and strong opinions. i wish i could say that every come everybody i ever before for anything, not just judges but election didn't disappoint at some point in time but that just out the world. by and large he's been a pretty solid supreme court justice.

looking at the best case scenario a few of his opinions but the opinion was one that was deferential to the congress which even though i'm running for president, i like presidents and courts to defer to congress because that's the body that our constitution wanted to rest most of the power of washington, d.c. on. again i'm not happy with his decision but again looking at it sort of the other way i can get myself to not be as upset about as i otherwise would be. as far as a constitutional amendment i co-authored and push for the vote on that amendment back in i think 2004. i believe we need a national standard for marriage but i don't think you can have a standard one state to another what marriage is. and so i will continue to support an effort to redefine,

to define marriage the way it was defined for 4000 years of human history. [inaudible] >> i think that's a mistake. i think i argued that 10 years ago when others wanted to do that 10 years ago. you can have a hodgepodge of marriages. the reason one of the reasons the court decide the way they decided because they recognize you can't have different marriage laws in different states. just creates too much confusion out there for on a variety of different levels. >> i want to get back to the state issued. there are a number of candidates within the top 10 who are on the cusp and then there are those on the other side of the cusp. easy in evidence, he said he will run --

[inaudible] >> i'm just going to do some media. i don't spend money to sort out in a campaign. >> do you see evidence that anyone in the field is gaming the system to try to get into the top 10? is there anyway, is there any way to speed the interesting thing is that the people to set the game up at have the biggest influence on who gets in because it's what they're going to put on the network and give airtime to. and a sense that control in some respect the ability to put their thumb on the scale to give some of them not that they're doing it. uncertain not i don't watch a lot so i have no idea who what they are doing. but they certainly have the ability to do that by come if they decided for example, rick santorum to be in the debate. it would be helpful for them for some reason to convict is this a

we'll put santorum on every single day and will have our anchors talk about this guy, just was on him. the point is they can. i'm not saying they are or will but they certainly can have an impact. because what's driving national numbers is company come into news coverage. that's what drives national numbers. if you folks have not ridden, if you folks have written as many stories about jeb bush as you did lindsey graham, my guess is jeb bush's we can be anywhere near where they are today. >> what was i going to ask you? is it a death spiral if you don't make the debate, you anyone else, you'll probably not make the next debate or the one after that. >> here's what i found. go back and look at four years ago. to get every election cycle. you go up you go down. that debate, to be a very interesting time and could

prove to be a wonderful opportunity for some come and esso and the past they could be a disaster for others. shoot their campaign right between the eyes. and so the idea that being in the debate there were debates i wasn't in less time and at that no impact on the campaign. again, i think something is early on with all the things that are going to happen between now and caucus day i just don't think it's going to be that important. >> yes, senator, so you've got this widely fragmented field and it appears that in order to break out you've got to say something outrageous. you are here for nasa talking about robert naughton what you think is terrific, but it's not outrageous. do you think you can do

basically what you did last time sort of plodding along? are the rules just when we funded the different this time is going to be all about money at all about being provocative to get immediate attention? can you be plodding and get to the finish line? >> i hope so their timing because that literally changed how to play them as again and what i believe in a don't think iowa has changed. america but likes to look at all the things going on in the national media, but in the end iowa is going to cut this deal down dramatically much more than whether you attend a debate or not. and if you can go there and connect as we did in the past and be successful, we are going to be one of a handful of guys, guys and gals i should say who

will be the nominee of the republican party. i always say i'm a tortoise and hare. i said this for years ago slow and steady wins the race that i was a real any opportunity for us in the next six months to break a. i didn't see it six years ago that we're going to break out. what i believe is about when people get down to the serious business of judging what you want to be their president not who they are insured for the moment not who gets them excited and gets them to cheer for something that they feel frustrated that no one is really speaking for them, leading the and they want to sit behind the resolute desk. i think it's a different calculation. we went through what 20 debates, 18 debates. and you think of a memorable line that rick santorum said? know. i mean that's not i mean i give good solid answers that are knowledgeable that show a clear

vision for what i want to accomplish and what's best for this country and on a bright of different topics and eventually people came around and said i think that guy could be president. and it coalesced. we had a lot of really wonderful people. they are just better folks out there and they are still. that may be the case but one of the things i learned is you don't know that this sort out the and what i do know is that we passed that test before and i think we can pass that test again even in light of this field. >> senator, you begin this session talking about income inequality, and you believe that, what you've read about is being primarily caused by a breakdown of the family spent i said that's what the studies have shown the principal reason the there are others. education public education.

i mentioned the manufacturing sector the economy has been dramatically reduced in this country and, therefore opportunities for a lot of non-college educated people to get good paying jobs has been compromised. so there's a lot of factors that don't want -- but that is certainly one of them. >> is a conservative view of limited government, can government do anything about reestablishing the american family and income inequality, or are those things not the business of -- >> i would say the answer is yes and no. when i said yes and no, there are things that the political system and public policy can do to affect the family. on a policy side i use the example of when i was campaigning in wisconsin four

years ago now congressman showed a study that showed if you're a single mother with two kids and you're making $15,000 a year and a state of wisconsin you are eligible for $38500 of welfare benefits. if you got married he would lose those benefits. and so what government has done all the intent of trying to help people was create a barrier for marriage among lower income single moms. and that's why you see the first time in history of our country and majority of kids are going to be raised at home without a father in home at some point. never to come and majority of kids born in america out of wedlock are born with fathers living in the home but not marriage. the arsenal for reasons. one, the marriage debate i would make the argument has now separate the idea of children

from marriage. marriage is really no longer about children. i think that's part of it. part of it is because government programs that particularly low-income individuals government programs make it economically not a viable to get married because you'd have to be making 55 and $60,000 a year which is above median income of immediate income, for the person to net benefits. the government is doing things all with the intent and i don't ascribe ill intent with the intent of trying to help requested that is great a barrier to marriage in america among lower income individuals. replicate public policy changes to stop that is sensitive because it's damaging for mothers and children in particular. that's what i did a public policy to let me shift over to what is another important area,

which is the power of the government, the bully pulpit. using the power of the presidency or of the government just to convene a discussion and a movement to actually try to do something in america about this. the president uses his bully pulpit power for many things but no more than climate change. he's constantly out of there. we passed -- to be passable climate change? no. as things happened? just. the presence but other pressing for this community and the churches and our schools come at all of these institutions out there that have a huge impact of what goes on in america. the president has driven this issue so they have taken up his cause and implemented and then things to try to promote this idea. imagine a president who said the most important issue right now

is restoring the nuclear family in america, is what can we do in your business to help. i was in business in chattanooga, tennessee, and the reason i mention chattanooga, in my book 10 years ago i wrote about chattanooga and a program called first things first. it was the first time a community writ large came together because they it very hard to a very high rates of single motherhood, et cetera. so they decided as a community to do something about it. they didn't pass a law but the churches in the schools and businesses and civic and community organizations came together in this critical first things first and implemented a variety of different things to try to get the community to bring families together. i was at a business better a couple of months ago and i just curious because you're in chattanooga, did you guys do anything for your families? i didn't explain.

what you do? for example, everybody that we have in our company, we give them a free dave ramsey course so they can -- we give one of our benefits is marriage counseling. so they went through all of these things that they do to support the nuclear family in chattanooga. they have made a conscious effort that the schools now talk about marriage and the importance of marriage and what marriage is and what is important to be married to have children i would suspect most schools in america don't do that. to talk about to talk about condoms but they won't talk about what it means to be a responsible father and the responsible family to all of those things can be done without any government programs because if we identify dana was talking about the book. i do know how many have read about the book that you read the book, we've got to walk away sank we can't let this continue in america. we just can't. and yet as to effort on the part

of the to, to do anything nothing by this president. nothing. he has a poverty summit but he wants to talk to really using the power of the presidency to try to change and start a debate and discussion of what we can do so the situations that are occurring every single day in america because children are abandoned by a system that is not focused on kids. i think we can make some real change spend we have about 10 minutes left will try to get in three more questions. >> if i filibuster -- >> i got out. senator four years ago your family played a big role in your campaign. you are a dataset and how have things changed in four years? is it easier, harder to be away? how do you stay there that? >> is hard.

seven kids going through those teenagers and everything. there are challenges. i'll be honest with you, but i feel, first off the biggest issue difficult for you to go was our daughter bella. the health problems she had. i'm just come we are just real excited she is doing better than she's ever done and has now for about three years. which after the campaign we realize we have to look at some things because she was just getting, there was a pattern of her getting sick, very socially sick. she had a pattern but it was getting worse. anyway we dug into some things and we actually found that therapy, we read about in our book so it's not -- should take something to boost our immune system and it is changed her life. she's doing great and so if she

was in the same position as she was four years ago i wouldn't be sitting here. but she is doing great and so we feel very, very comfortable on that front. we have six of the kids and as i said they're going through their teenage and college years and i don't need is any more than that. but it's last time around it was a family enterprise and inspite of the travel and other things, it action in many respects brought them even closer together. everybody is excited about it. our kids it's just fighting him off as to who goes what trip because everybody wants to be out on the trip into things. it's sort of like the family business. you want to go into a store and participate. i feel very good. our family is well prepared to do it.

not to say that we don't over issues like every other family but if we didn't then you should worry about us, right speak with you will be taking a pay cut if you win, right speak with i guess i would. but that's okay. it's a pretty good job. >> thanks for being here. could you talk a little bit about your experience taken on the clinton machine as you put it and you being like the more formidable candidate? >> we took on the machine in 1994 when i ran against harris and we're up against -- and bill and hillary came to pennsylvania with great frequency to campaign against us. pennsylvania is not the reddest of states. we felt that we went up against the best and brightest israel and this was a race that he they wanted to win. why? because health care was the

issue back in 1994. and the capital against was the senate sponsor in fact you go back to look at your political history. is raised in 1991 really ushered bill clinton and. into the race into the 92 campaign because carville and begala ran his race and 91 made health care issue. went down to little rock and visit their experience in pennsylvania and 91 and applied it to the race in 92 and the rest is history. but had a lot riding on pennsylvania in 94. let me assure you they threw the kitchen sink at us. we were able to survive. i remind people that in 2000 we won by five points in 2000 in a state bush lost by four. we were the only conservative to win in a state that bush lost. i think we have a good track record of being able to overcome big election of the they may not

be too incumbents. i represent a safe-deposit democratic seat and a 70% in aquatic seek my first two terms in congress. i think that a pretty good track record. and get which an election we can be pretty effective. i feel like hillary clinton is in some ways tougher than barack obama, and in some ways and in some ways these you. i think hillary will have a harder time galvanizing her face. i think she probably has little bit more of an opportunity outside of her face. the present less time lost independent and moderate. that would've an opportunity for me at least publicly, then better there but i think she will have pluses and minuses but again we have a track record. i've not just can't up against the political game but also went up against her in the united

states said on more than one occasion and i think we did pretty well when we did that. if you're looking at the big performances and how well you can stack up and be effective i think we have some pretty good evidence that we will do very well. >> last question. >> i'm actually going to follow up on paul on december utah family, get out there. are they going to see more of mrs. santorum at this time? last unshed a a a pretty rough go of it and after it was a role in the campaign santorum 2.0 may be speak with one of the things i try to do with the family the least disruptive model possible. particularly with our daughter who is doing well but she still 24/7 care. if karen is not there, then we can't hire someone to be there. that becomes economically challenging, let's just put it that way. i will be honest with you, a big part of it is just family

economics for us to have nursing care when karen is not home 24 hours a day it gets expensive and it's not covered by insurance or anything like that. supportso part of it is driven by just the family realities of having a disabled child it requires 24/7 care and the other reality is that with six other kids. they are going through teenage years and sort of good tv gushing sort of be put up a pair from and. we had some experience about that in the last year or so. karen and i have sort of division of labor, if you will. and i think karen does an amazing job on the campaign trial, is a huge asset, the most important asset that we have is our family. and while she may be a great asset on the campaign, she is the indispensable asset at home. and so that's the way we're

going to do all sorts of opportunities on the campaign. >> thanks for doing this. >> you bet. >> thank you. >> thank you. somewhat painless. >> glad. >> somewhat. [inaudible conversations] >> her travels across the country with time warner cable to learn more about the literary life and history of lexington kentucky. edward pritchard was a state he

reported tumultuous political career. >> in the mid 1940s if you had asked who is a bright shining star in american politics, on a national specimen to the governor center france presse a lot of people would've said ed pritchard. it worked in the white house when he was in his early '20s. he seemed destined for great things and thinking back to kentucky in the mid 1940s, was indicted for stuffing a ballot box, went to prison. and so that incredible promise just flamed out. >> we also visit ashland the former home of speaker of the house, senators suggested henry clay. >> the mansion at ashland is a unique situation. his original home had to be torn down and rebuilt. it fell into disrepair and his son found that it could not be safe.

so he rebuilt on the original foundation. so what we have is a home that is essentially a five part federal style home as henry clay had with italian detail architectural elements et cetera and an added layer of aesthetic detail added by henry clay's granddaughter and great-granddaughter and so one. >> see all of our programs from lexington saturday evening at 6:30 p.m. eastern and sunday afternoon at 2 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. >> booktv is television for serious readers your join us this saturday starting at 11 a.m. eastern for all they live coverage of the harlem book fair, the nation's flagship african-american literary event featuring historian pamela newkirk and on sunday august 2, author and code pink cofounder on in depth saturday september 5

we are live from our nation's capital for the national book festival celebrating its 15th year old on sunday with our lives in depth program with former second lady and senior fellow at the american enterprise institute lynn cheney. that's a few of the upcoming live programs on c-span2's booktv. >> the u.s. senate about the gavel in to start the day. following later remarks lawmakers will return to the education policy bill for the fifth day. their time to update the no child left behind law which was introduced during george w. bush's administration. several minutes minutes are pending but no votes are currently scheduled to the center hopes to finish the bill this week. we may see some work on the highway and transportation spending bills at the house is in today with work plan on a number of bills from the financial services committee including one that would allow housing and urban developer to

barber to work with the private sector to reduce energy and water costs in subsidized housing units. you can watch the house live on c-span and now live to the senate floor it on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. father of all, give us your wisdom in these challenging times. may your wisdom ignite within