undertake to take advantage of this moment? >> japheth sounds to me like an accurate characterization of what the president said in the interview and the view that he was expressing was based on his own analysis of what is occurring on the ground and i think many analysts with some expertise in this area have concluded that president assad's grip on power is not as strong as it once was and i don't have any specific conversation to tell you about but there is reason to believe it's not just analysts in the united states that have made this observation, but other registered parties in the region have reached the conclusion as well. ..

>> more likely to be constructed.

but i think it's safe for you to assume that the president's national security team, has been and will continue. and to consider a range of policy options that could improve, it's just an awful situation. i had an opportunity to refer to it earlier this week. in the united states has committed significant resources to leave some of that suffering and ease that burden on others in the country. that have taken on so much responsibility for the refugees. so there are variety of reasons to be concerned about the situation and we continue to monitor. >> did the president call to inform him. >> the president was given a heads up and it advance of the

announcement. >> wasn't a call from the senator himself. >> no i don't have that information. >> you said he wont be surprised if the democratics caucus numbers were to take this into consideration who their next leader should be, how provocative would it be would it be for president schumer to start talking about it. >> again ultimately i think it will be at decision that members of the senate will have to make and i'm not sure my opinion on that matters to much. >> that won't stop you from wayne and another thing. >> in this case i'll defer. >> can you measure the frustration level inside the white house right now is to mark. >> again i would stick with my

description as before, it's disappointed but not surprising. the fault line of this argument date back more than a decade the difference of opinion that pres. obama obama and president schumer has for quite some time. in his announcement he made a strong case for president of the united states seeking to impose the will of the united states on a sovereign country. like those occurred that it in 2003, it's not serving the united states very well. that is the essence of the disagreement there. >> and getting back to the debate last night, was there one comment that was made that you would take most concession to, what struck you as being something you really had a problem with last night?

>> i think i'm going to resist the urge to choose just one, there were so many. >> i'll try another one, if i'm not mistaken secretary clinton will likely be in martins vineyard roughly the same time as the president will be there and it may overlap, it didn't happen last year. do you think it's possible the two will meet it, it's a small island. >> i don't know precisely what secretary clinton's itinerary will be but i went rule out that they make cross paths, if they do will be in a position to let you know. >> i want to go back to i want

to ask you about the iran deal. what is the overall number that you have question works. >> i don't have an overall number in front of me, if i did i'm not sure i would share it. to illustrate the persuasive power of the speech the president delivered on wednesday, the tally i gave you were individual publicly announced supports. merely as a service to you i highlighted, i collated the collated the public safety initiative and telling them up for you. again just the raw numbers here is were talk about one bowl per member of congress, individual members of congress has come out had is an indication of the mental we want to build on a

strong majority of the democratic caucus. [inaudible] >> i haven't seen mr. scott's statement. it's hard for me to evaluate without having seen it. >> all right, on another subject the debate last night. there was a verbal against chris christie and pres. obama would you weigh on that please. >> in your opinion what was the essence of that republicans are really upset about that. it was are they upset there was

a vote. >> we didn't have time after the 2012 after that legislative action occurred. what it symbolized a lot of people is the willingness of leaders in this country, to set aside their own partisan identity particularly in a time of crisis to ensure the interest of the people they were elected to serve are protected. and here you had an incidence, shortly before an election a democratic president and republican governor trying to meet the needs of new jersey that were significantly negatively affected by the storm. i think the expectation that people have for their government is that we expect to have robust

debates, and were going to have differences of opinion, even occasionally within our own political parties. but when the chips are down, and when were in the midst of a crisis and crisis and when american lives arctic state, the american people have an expectation that the elected leaders will put aside their political difference and get things done. in this particular situation i got outside attention because it was leading up to a national election. this is the kind of governing style the american people rightly expect and it certainly is the kind, is the approach that president obama has prioritized even in less high profile, less scrutinized situations. it's not, for the president to travel to other areas of the country in a state of national real disaster, even if it's cleared the vast majority of the population the

american people in those communities appreciate that the president of the united states is there. having the opportunity to put travel with the president to these communities in both oklahoma and arkansas that were affected by tornadoes, even i was struck by. there probably weren't a lot of obama voters in the crowd but at each turn we've seen the president very warmly received. i think the expectation is what the american people have of their political leaders and it's one of the reasons that president is so proud to lead this country.

>> do you think the president is able to reach across the out before he leaves the presidency? >> i think you've just seen him planet peace presentation creating a wilderness area in the state of idaho and sending over his shoulders one of the republican congressman. i think that's one example of the president trying to find common ground with the republicans. in trying to republicans trying to find common ground with the president as well. it's not just the presidents effort to reach out and find common ground when it's most important, but also a manifestation manifestation of the expectation of the american

people that in some of the darkest, read congressional districts in the country that the expectation of even those people is that their member of congress will work effectively with a member of congress to advance the interest of their community. >> i wasn't there so maybe you should tell me. >> you called it disappointing are you under the hope or expectation that he would wait until after his vacation and into december. >> it's not clear to me what the expectations anybody had of senator schumer's permit what

the administration sought to do was work closely with him to help him understand the facts of the agreements and understand the details of what was actually agreed to, that gives the president so much confidence that i mentioned on tuesday the efforts by the administration to engage senator schumer actually predated the completion of the agreement that present senator schumer had indicated no willingness with iraq and the security team to understand the details. it would have been foolish for the administration to robust his interest merely because of his widely known views as it relates to the iraq war in 2003. were going to engage him in pursuit of an opportunity to

support the deal, ultimately it didn't turn out that way. i don't think anyone was surprised but i think that would account for the the disappointment we've expressed. >> and there is a suggestion that maybe the president will be working during his vacation. >> was my intent to convey to you that there would not be much time spent on making phone calls but i certainly went rule out that he would make some calls. that would have been true regardless of the timing or the outcome of senator schumer. >> obviously pres. obama's not on the ballot, but his policy is under attack.

does it seem at all with the what the republican essay and the reason why the middle east is such a mess now but they're saying because we president obama ordered troops out of iraq that's why, can you at least, and on that? >> i think it doesn't hurt to illustrate the starkly different approaches by democrats and the president obama. president obama has made clear that he does not see the scenario where u.s. military personnel will be engaged in combat operation in iraq or syria. i know know many republicans on the stage last night who either on the stage or

previously articulated their support for a strategy that would include significant commitment of u.s. boots on the ground in iraq and syria. the president doesn't believe that would be the best way to advance national security in the united states. that's a disagreement we've had for a long time and ultimately the american people will have to use their own judgment about starting another war on the ground in the middle east. >> trouble start when president obama ordered the troops to start cycling down in iraq or didn't start before? >> i think what we been clear about is trace setting the genesis of the situation and back in 2003. there is a sense of discussion that al qaeda in iraq, a canada was not in iraq until the invasion occurred. since then we have been dealing with the consequences of that invasion and the infiltration and propagation of the extremist

forces in iraq. we are dealing with those consequences even today. >> on the iran deal the criticism over, and, and over was the united states got nothing. what did the united states get? >> well what the united states got out of this deal is something that republicans and even prime minister netanyahu has long said is the top priority which is verifiably not allowing iran to obtain a nuclear weapon. it's something they all agreed that they had said. and this had said this is the best way for us to accomplish that goal. >> on immigration, is there a

change in policy, it says when you read it it sounds as though dhs is standing changing its policy on the detention center. >> we discussed yesterday that this is something the administration and president has long acknowledged that's a very difficult policy challenge. one that has been difficult to confront. for the details of the policy in the way it's described to the judge, i prefer the department of homeland security i want to inadvertently describe it at a different way this is a challenging issue and one the administration takes serious. >> and the response dhs says from a two-week period more than

60% of those at the detention center were released, was this because the white house is again changing policy? >> for those specific enforcement issues i defer to dhs. >> yesterday we saw the announcement that the u.s. had transferred the wife of a senior isis leader to i rocky custody and the statement from the white house it says that she was put in the detention of an american, i want to know it they're saying she will not face u.s. charges was there a policy decision not to more aggressively pursue that avenue? of trying those charges. >> i think there a couple of things that factor in here the

decision to transfer her was based on a unanimous interagency decision and that the transfer would be appropriate due to legal, situations. i there were many agencies consulted about this particular decision, the determination of the position has been conducted in full coronation with the government of iraq. both the united states and the iraqi government are supportive of this transfer. one thing i will add is that u.s. personnel did have an opportunity to interrogate her for an extended period of time to maximize the collection of available, and useful intelligence. she was married to a senior isil

leader, who was killed in a special operations raid in c syria earlier this year. we do suspect that she is with a member of iselin played an important role in the isil terrace and we believe her and her husband are complicit in the captivity of the u.s. citizen. we also think they are complicit in another young woman who was rescued at the time of her capture. we have a firm believe that in the context of the iraqi criminal justice system that she will be held accountable. >> given what you just laid out as their frustration or disappointment that now someone so complicit and engaged in a fairly senior level of isil is

outside the reach? >> again the decision to press charges in the u.s. court is made by prosecutors at the department of justice. that's a decision they would make, and they would be able to give you more of a next one nation on the decision that may. at the same time, the reason you have brought interagency consensus, that this was the right approach, is the united states has confidence that once i have will face justice in the iraq he justice system. >> and lastly you talked about their review of a policy that we have undertaken, how is this communicated to the families? was there communication to the families in regards to the.

>> yes it was communicated to ms. mueller's family mueller's family prior to this public announcement. >> i have a newly created. >> the i don't know exactly how that communication occurred but it was communicated to ms. mueller's family here in the united states before any public announcement of this decision was made. >> another question, she was captured in syria, she was living in syria why she sent to iraq question mike. >> she's an iraqi citizen. i would refer you to the iraqi criminal officials about that obviously there's some reason to be skeptical of the syrian justice system at this point. for the charges she will face and where they took place i would do for you to the iraqi criminal justice system. but the reason why she was transferred is because she was a citizen of iraq.

[inaudible] >> we been pretty worth right and candid about the significant challenges we face in trying to implement the training equip strategy, when it comes to recruiting training and supporting of moderate syrian opposition fighters. to take the fight to isil on the ground in syria. one of the most significant challenges, is conducting background checks there is a priority place to making sure that those going through the training program and receive significant equipment are not individuals who are prepared to use that training and the equipment against coalition forces. or other moderate.

it's been a difficult challenge as i mentioned yesterday the president has been briefed on the current state of this mission. i've often said the united states and the president and his team, is interested in working with our coalition to make sure we are constantly reviewing the policies we have in place and updating, improving and refining them when necessary to better accomplish our goal. >> for an update on the update on the equipment i do for you to the iraqi department.

[inaudible] any other areas that i could sites senator schumer has been supportive of other democrats in pursuit of the president agenda. there is no denying that with this agreement, difference of opinion that emerged overnight is one that has existed between senator schumer and president obama for more than a decade. >> just one question in the report port said one american official had visited russia, the details of the visit was three days with president putin and other officials so so make what the un security council so they

asking for some type of investigation with the un. >> i'm not aware i do for you to our mission at the united nations for information for any kind of request or making of the united nations. i would remind you that we have been very clear that we do not anticipate even the success implementation of this nuclear concern is is not going to change the behavior. >> if this is true this person was in the forefront of the accusation of the deal that actually he is being given more money and we will have more opportunity to the middle east.

>> when the people who are making the argument are wrong, the sanctions against mr. sue lonnie through the united nations will remain in place and will be a minute for ten years. the president has been clear that the united states sanctions against mr. sue will nami are affected by the deal because of his support for terrorism will keep the sanctions in place and were certainly mindful of his activity and our level of concern about them has not changed. i will tell tell you our level of concern about his activity would be greater if he had access to a nuclear weapon. that's why were working so hard to prevent iran from obtaining one. [inaudible] >> mark, has president obama ready to leave on vacation later today, would you say that that

this is a vacation he really needs badly. >> i think it is true that those of you who have been closely following the president, would note that his schedule has been especially demanding in the last several weeks. i think you would also be quick to tell you that the last several weeks have been especially rewarding for him. it's included a historic trip to africa it's included a completion of negotiation on iran from a tainting a nuclear weapon it included after a couple of snafus the passage of trade negotiation authority. which will hopefully allow the

united states and other nations to complete a trade agreement to say nothing of the supreme court rulings that once again upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act, and affirmed the right for everyone in this country to marry who they love. it's been a rather rewarding, satisfying several weeks. the pace of those accomplishments and the pace of that progress has been rapid. >> i think he took a look at his schedule and realized that he would be able to fulfill all of his immediate responsibilities at a decent hour today that would allow him to spend the night in martha's vineyard and get started on his vacation first thing tomorrow morning. i know the president is looking

forward to spending some time with his family when he gets up there. >> so if you ever find out what he was talking about when, at the start of this au speech he said he said even presidents have trouble with toner. >> i think he there may have been a little bit a snafu about the backstage printer at american university. >> if it's not one thing it's another. [inaudible] >> let me start by saying the united states condemns in the strongest terms last night's bombing in cabo which reportedly killed more than eight people. the latest report may be said 14

or 15, and there could be more and wounded as many as 400 civilians including women, and children. this attack represents the ever-growing problem between extremists and the people of afghanistan it certainly shows the blatant disregard for human life on the part of those extremists. the fact is in recent years the afghan people have endured much, they are resilient, and are resilient even in the face of a brutal insurgency. we continue to believe and king continue to urge the taliban to keep pres. connie's call for reconciliation and make genuine peace with the afghan government. i would add that in terms of

who's responsible for the attack i would do for to the government avast afghanistan. what is clear is there does appear to be an opening and we are hopeful that the taliban will take advantage of that opening and try to pursue a genuine peace with the effort dan government. the president connie has made clear that he would support that effort and hopefully those overtures will be reciprocated by the taliban. [inaudible] i think it's both let me explain why. you will recall when the sanctions were duly put in

place, three or four years ago, the united states traveled around the world including to india, sat down with the indian government, and asked them to curtail the amount of iranian oil that they poured into the country. we acknowledged in the context of those discussions that this would be an economic sacrifice that the the people of india and the economy of india would have to risk, but they agree to it saying it's something they're willing to do if it can advance our effort to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. in essence that was the agreement, like countries like india had agreed they would take these steps, even at their own expense to try to reach this broader international.

the good news is that agreement has been reached and it is in agreement that is supported by the international community. 99% of the world as the president has described it. that's why it would be so damaging for the standing up united states, for the united states congress to act unilaterally to kill the steel. no longer would countries like india, who have been making a substantial sacrifice over the years, have any interest or incentive to continue to enforce the sanctions against iran. there is no basis, there is no credible claim as to why they would be willing to do that. there is no denying, the significant negative impact of the united states credibility ability to be isolated in this way. that's why pres. said if congressman for to kill the steel or kill this agreement it

would in fact yield a better deal for iran. because what we would see as iran we would get sanctions relief, they would be able to sell oil to india and get the proceeds for doing so. without having to reduce their nuclear stockpile by 98%, without having to put 13000 centrifuges in story, without having to got there plutonium reactor and without having to submit to the most intensive sanctions and inspections on their nuclear program. the question is whether or not the united states international communities going to get anything for it. that is ultimately the choice before members of congress right now, it's why why we continue to be confident we will be able to build substantial support, at least in the democratic caucus.

>> after the ministration is charge republicans with that presidents of port for something led republicans to oppose it do you think with the iran deal essay the republican government would produce the same document would republicans oppose it as they did not now? >> opposes a good hypothetical, the first thing is there's no denying the fact that senior republicans in the united states congress appeared on television two days before the agreement was reached and announce, to announce their opposition to the deal. senator mcconnell appeared on fox news sunday two days before the agreement was reached and proclaimed the deal quote a bad deal on quote. this is

before it was reached or even an ounce. the question question is, why did he do that? does he have remarkable powers of clairvoyance? it's possible. it seems more likely that he is committed to the kinds of argument that he and other republicans made in 2003 that led up to the iraq war. that he's committed to this idea that is not diplomacy is not worth the effort, that were in the middle east is easy and we can easily work our will and that opinions of some of our closest allies and partners in the world are not worth paying attention to. those are exactly the arguments that were made in the march to war in 2003, and these are exactly the kind of arguments we hear from her publicans including senator mcconnell as they advocate against the deal.

>> does the president think it's also a matter of him if someone else was negotiating, or his administration is negotiating the deal is what led to the bulk of the opposition? >> i think it's hard to tell there's a variety of motives that could be described here. the clearest one is again senator mcconnell is making the same argument that he made in 2003 and is the president's view that those arguments and the policy that resulted from those arguments did not of bands the interest of the united states in terms of going to iraq in 2003. he does not believe it would serve while the interest of united states if they were used to successfully kill an agreement that 99% of the world agrees with.% of the world agrees with. >> does the white house be a a multiplier effect from senior democrats opposing this that perhaps they would sway others? >> not particularly, also a couple of things. the first there is us story and

political their carefully covering our words this week they did a story about the competing political pressures on senator schumer now that i'm embarrassed that i'm going to be nice to them, because of their diligence and reporting out that story they interviewed a couple of democratic united states senators to continue to be undecided at least publicly, on whether or not to support this agreement. both senator koester and mcallister were quoted in the story is same senator schumer's decision would have no impact on theirs. i think senator koester had hoped the reporter wouldn't tell senator schumer that his opinion would have a factor. the other data i can point out to you is senator schumer is the senior senator from new york,

the junior senator from new york also came out yesterday and she announced her support for the deal. since then senator schumer made his announcement, at least me semi- tally but as far as i can tell there's one democratic senator who has announced his opinion since then, i think there's a preponderance of evidence to indicate that democrats are going to make up their minds not a son senator schumer's conclusion but based on their own conclusion on the merits of this agreement. including a strategy to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. were going to continue to feel confident. >> how engaged what you say is the president in the republican primary process?

do you think one of these folks might meet him on inauguration day, is he curious to see what the debate happens #speemac he's certainly following the terms of the debate, just not in real time. so the president is aware of the broader political debate that's ongoing, on confidence he will be more than just a casual observer at 16 months or so before election day is 15 minutes. there have been a couple of occasions where he has been act directly about the outrageous claims of those who are running to replace him, at least one or two occasions he has shied away from responding. >> do you think senator schumer's influence. [inaudible] >> it's hard to measure exactly,

what kind of influence he has on these matters. he clearly is someone very focused on the issue but he's also somebody who's arrived at a sharply different conclusion than the president has. i don't think any of you including all of you has had an opportunity to interact with the president when he is talking about this issue. i think it's hard to quantify we continue to be confident that the vast majority of democrats in the united states congress will make a decision based on their own conclusion not on senator schumer's. >> what will be going on during this period in early september to start voting on this and even though you could still feasibly lose it so it's a strategy?

>> as we talked about yesterday the steel does not rate quire congressional approval but there is no doubt that congress can play the spoiler here. we are continuing to be confident of our ability to prevent that from happening. but we certainly don't take any of these folks for granted. while congress was in session you saw senior members of the national security team spending a lot of time on capital hill and classified settings, and public meetings and even testifying under oath. i think when congress is out of session there be a number of private conversations that occur between members of congress and the national security team and i'm confident when the president returns to the white house in a few weeks he also will reengage in that effort, and will also be making a number of calls and having conversations.

>> a person close to the decision said this announcement from schumer but the white house leaked it last night deliberately because it would get buried with all the attention on the republican debate. did the white house leak this? >> no i'm not sure who thought leaking it on thursday night would bury it anyone his been in this business for a few days would understand that announcing this on 4:00 o'clock on a friday, particularly a friday before the president and i assume many of you are prepared to go on vacation would have been a more effective strategy. >> the president did not spend his leisure time last night watching the debate, perhaps jon

stewart? >> i don't know if he watched jon stewart's final show, it definitely started too late for me to stay up and watch it. hopefully i'll be. hopefully i'll be a catch up over the weekend. >> because the president did an interview that will air on sunday i wanted to follow up on senator schumer does the president believe schumer is going to vote against the iran deal. >> ii think what he said in his interview does directly apply in this case. that the concerns he has with the republican conference as they announce their opposition

to the agreement before the agreement was even announced before it was even reached before it was even available for members of congress to read. that's an indication of their ideological opposition to this deal. hardliners in i ron are also ideologically opposed. i also point out the other way in which republicans and hardliners in iran were writing us a letter to the supreme leader in iran, tracking arguments trying to convince the supreme leader of iran not to a engage in the agreement. that's the essence of the president's case. senator schumer reached a conclusion but the essence of our disagreement is vigorous but it's different. schumer is advocating an approach to foreign up policy that minimizes success and relies far too much on the

ability of the united states to unilaterally impose our will through force if necessary on a sovereign middle eastern country. that's what what schumer indicated in 2003, the president does not believe that served well the interest of the united states in 2003 and he doesn't believe it serves the interest of the united states now. >> even though the united states is disappointed in schumer, there is a distinction between him and center of o'connell, is that o'connell expressed his views in july and schumer expresses views in august 7. >> what i'm saying is the timing of these announcements

mcconnell announced his opposition to the deal, he referred to it as a bad deal before it was even reached. while we are still sitting on the negotiating table in vienna. barbie fourth and agreement was released and announce, that's an indication that he was ideologically opposed to this the same way that people in iran were opposed to it. >> you're saying that prides senator schumer had an open minds about this. >> what i'm saying is that schumer at least read the agreement, talk to the experts involved in negotiating, spent time talking to experts to understand the nuclear basis and some of the conclusions reached by her negotiators, that at least demonstrates an argument to the other side. given his well-known view on a

range of foreign policy issues the result is not particularly surprising. >> the debate last night had a viewership of like 60 million people is the president concerned that the viewership last night will in some way overtake his own appeal later in the week while members are at home, while members have gone home. >> know the present is not worried about that. >> to follow up on the schumer did he indicate he was going to

vote to both override the president's veto? >> i don't know the details of the information is transmitted from schumer's office to the white house, so i do for you to schumer's office for detailed explanation of if you would override a presidential veto. >> you are pragmatic yesterday when you asked about does the number matter, you said it it's really congress who screwed it up. when democratic senators are considering their literary leadership should they consider the vote to disapprove and the vote to override or, is your pragmatism should it lead into the democratic senate.

>> ultimately they'll decide on the criteria that they set. i don't have any advice. i would protect and suspect that they will apply that test as they consider their vote for the next democratic leader. >> you're saying the white house remains pragmatic about the utility of the vote and unloading it is not necessarily as important as. >> my point is i think democrats in the senate will make up their own minds and apply their own criteria in terms of who and how they choose the next leader, i merely suspect that many of them included in their criteria the voting record of those who say they want to leave the caucus. ultimately that's up to them to decide, maybe some of them won't, it's their own decision to make. >> in terms of in terms of the best way for congress neither poverty party who wants to support the deal we both

encourage them strongly, and is not a close call in terms of making the decision, to and certainly oppose an effort to override the presidential veto if that disapproval does pass. >> on a geo dp debate on the gop debate all 17 pone minutes oppose same-sex marriage. >> i think it's a hard thing to say so much of the progress that has been made is in progress

that a substantial number of americans have come around to support. i think it speaks to not just the critically important political progress that has been made in this country on some of these issues, but in some ways i think it's a persuasive argument that at least as important as that, is the social progress that has been made in communities large and small across the countries. discussions of these issues are taking place outside the context of any political election or partisan debate i think it's my view, at least some of that social progress would not have been possible without some political leadership and that is why the president is justifiably proud of his record. the real power behind this change in the views of so many

americans, as we perfect our union, is the power of the american people. the significant change we have seen in a relatively short period of time. [inaudible] >> again i think this is my answer i think some of the social progress that has been made can be attributed to some political leadership, including political leadership from the president of the united states. there is no doubt we would have liked to seen congress take some of the steps that the president has been forced to take on his own, to try to make our country more just and fair. congress has resisted,

ultimately those voters who prioritize the issues, i'm confident will look carefully at the views and records of those running for president because there's no denying the kind of authority they could yield sitting in the oval office on these issues. >> i want to follow up regarding the transfer of the eye bracket detainee you said the record the obama administration has of capturing and building a case, trying terrorist suspects in the u.s. courts, what part of the decision because there is insufficient evidence so was there insufficient evidence that

would have either held up in the u.s. court, is that part of the reasoning or is it additionally because the iraqi government opposed given the provisions in their own constitution that they can hand over their citizens and also why was she given to the kurds instead of the iraqi authorities? >> there is a lot there, let me see if i can get there. in terms of why she will put through the kurdish system while we can't guarantee a particular result, we do have a firm belief that she will be held accountable for her crimes and the united states and its ready to cooperate with the authorities in iraq to support her prosecution and insist that justice is served. the other relevant facts is that she has been deep tamed and held

for the last few months and in the course of that detention we worked closely with the government and the criminal justice authority there, one of the other reasons this makes sense in terms of having her go through the kurdish criminal justice system relates to the location of potential witnesses. who would take part in these proceedings. i'm not aware of any concern the department of justice expressed about the weakness of their case, you can go speak to them or directly about this. i think you could conclude that we believe this is the best course of action because as i

referred to earlier, this is the conclusion of the intelligence community, certainly our national security and our law enforcement officials, this is the best position and this is the conclusion we reached in agreement with iraq he officials as well. >> what did baghdad have for her? >> the central government and baghdad certainly agreed. >> tomorrow is the year anniversary of the military operation against the islamic state you mentioned earlier that expanded military options in syria might be counterproductive to efforts to come to a political transition there's been some hesitance to discuss what authority the u.s. might have when it comes to protecting the fighters against anyone whether it's isis, is that reluctance to impart to see in

that discussion as counterproductive? >> know i have been willing the contents of this briefing earlier this week to discuss legal justification that our partners have already taken and and trained and equipped soldiers that are fighting iceland syria. the administration has concluded that is appropriate under the 2001 for united states and our coalition partner to take strikes against extremists that are threatening u.s. or coalition trained syrian forces that are operating on the ground against isil. that the polities policy decision that has been made.

>>

>> and is ready to welcome the prime minister next month. they will be here it new york. has he been invited by obama before he leaves? >> cry of not aware of any planned visit from the prime minister to the white house in conjunction with his travel through the united states or the u.n. general assembly. >> tomorrow members of march from the lincoln memorial.

bin there will be congressman there to make a statement. any word from the president? because they're asking. >> win this tragic event originally occurred, of we express our profound sorrow at the loss of life and offer our sincere condolences to the families of those who had loved ones in the attack. linkedin would remind you this administration has made counter violence and extremism like we saw in wisconsin a top priority. this kind of extremism and

this administration is determined to work with elected officials and law enforcement and community leaders across the country to counter it. this is the challenge and risk the administration doesn't take lightly as they continue 24-hour is a day seven days a week. with that i hope all of you will get a chance to take up a little vacation while the president is on vacation. so we will not be convening in the briefings will he is out. you have a couple weeks off. enjoy. [inaudible conversations]

senate coming to the 310 million people in and a world of thousands of tv channels and billions of websites it is easy for people to feel disconnected from their democracy and to feel i don't matter and my voice is not her. when i show up to any event or speak to a group, there i

am as people's government that is the way representative democracy should work i feel if you come into a constituency office they will feel better about their government in terms of being heard. i knew every single call we get i know what they're calling about because it cuts to be. i cannot stress that enough. you will see people believed in democracy more warrior there and present and listening

>> looking at america the by the numbers do you vote? if you do, tell us why and if you don't we would like to know how, as well and we look forward to hearing your thoughts. the new numbers are all from the census bureau one of them is say sociologists that the u.s. census bureau with a branch that covers education with that social status -- stratification we are also here with philip bump but first let's go to a specific number for you to 14. you write in 2014 congressional election turnout was the lowest since

1978. >> guest: you are correct beginning in the 1970's the congressional turnout was 48.9 across the entire country it dropped that what we found over time it dropped for presidential and congressional elections then we unpacked that low turnout number by age and race. >> host: we will be digging through that but why is that the case? >> there is a lot of reasons. the high correlation between how often or how secure they are in their lives, older voters tend to vote more often because they have a stable home or they are retirees. and what we see over time is an addition, obviously we went through a financial crisis fairly recently but

greasy politics shift overtime as well but it makes them less interested. do you vote? why or why not? if you wonder why we set up the numbers like that it is because the study was put together that way. >> we did the overall turnout rate analysis specifically by race and age. what we found older

americans that has not all hispanics we found that older people vote more than younger or middle-aged. that has happened across the entire united states. host: the electorate has grown increasingly diverse. guest: in some ways that just mirrors the population as a whole. one part of the analysis shows what part -- what does electorate look like ecco -- he ecco --? host: hispanic origin, let's get your perspective. guest: we jumped the gun a little bit like talk about age. there is actually a fast-moving curve. we are working with trading purposes.

if you look at the curve over time it looks like this. it drops off very quickly and slowly climbs back up. we are seeing a correlation there. my jumped the gun, i jumped the gun by talking about it. nobody has ever done a good job of convincing voters that it is worth thinking that time in the go out and get the polls. it is a tough case to make when you are working two jobs and just move. all these factors come into play. we have consistently not been able to make the case that is worth their time. host: how much do we know? guest: the race component is very interesting. we still see that there is stratification by race and ethnicity.

whites still tend to vote and a higher rate >> >> in a lot of this is cruz the correlated but also looking at the big picture but when you look at the hispanics in the united states tend to be younger than the white people so there is some major overlap. as the population ages do they show the engagement? >> that is exactly right simic the other thing that i point out that i find most fascinating that the electorate was as diverse in 2014 during the midterm election when the results suggest it was not day very diverse suffer because they won so handily but despite

that it was as diverse as in 2008 to which people see as the highwater mark and now even midterm elections have that spirit we reported for presidential is but now this is the first time we show them for a black not hispanics was higher than white non-hispanic sandoz elections or special for their own reasons by the engaged electorate with the current congressional the electorate is as well and that is an indication that perhaps regardless of a specific election there could be diverse engagement going forward if that translates but particularly next year one of the reasons non-white voting in from the first african-american president is fascinating to watch 2016 how the of population of the nonwhite

voters is. >> one of the headlines to one of the stories to the electorate for since 2018 and that's remarkable. we have the lion's broken up by age. mexico good morning. >> caller:. >> are you there? now let's try steve. can you hear us? between 35 and 44 years old. >> caller: the question i have there is an increase of

the turnouts of whites and hispanics. why do think is driving that? so what is contributing to that growth and turnout and also for the turnout of those people from 2014? barracks of the question is what is driving a minorities to a one what we are good at is a document what happens.

[laughter] >> to answer the question we cannot say with certainty. part of it is that the population has grown more diverse and over time will we haven't talked about yet is what we are seeing now happening with the electorate the years we expect to happen and long-term as it will grow increasingly hispanic but part of that absence of a is the fact as a percentage of the entire population there are more hispanics them there were in the past that is why there are more hispanic voters. but other than that it is hard to determine even india election on of a grand scale what gets to the polls and what doesn't put on a local level these change a lot so it is hard to say.

>> host: go-ahead. 65 and older line. >> caller: attwood just like to say go donald trump. [laughter] he is the only one out there that can be bought. he is not a politician. >> but we do get the point but that was the last segment but now we are talking about voter turnout. this is the lowest amount since 1978 would you like to speak about that? >> caller: i would like to speak because all the people need to turn now. we need to back the people.

>> the real question is the consistency of the americans voting and also the future of the country racial -- racially but with a large group of ages of where americans currently are and that is a fundamental question. >> we see across the board older americans vote that once you're hooked as a habit i think the real question going forward does this new demographic shift? >> are there anecdote -- and it goes out there? >> not that i see we are so early it is hard to use the but because the population is still so young if you look at a map of the country by ethnicity or age you can

spot them on the map. but to the point of donald trump, one of the reasons the republican party is on a tear they are worried. he tied himself to the immigration issue and did very well in the polls of republican party standpoint they also want to know what is going to happen moving forward because it will be an increasing part of the electorate so that is why he stresses them all so much. >>. >> caller: good morning. isn't there a little overemphasis of the voters rather than a substantial issues that affect this country? it seems people may not be going to the of polls

because of the issues are complex with little understand them but it just seems there is not enough emphasis our focus on a the real issues that people need to think about going to the polls so of the culture of the music artist rather than focusing on the boring of the important issues that affect our lives so much as placed on ethnicity and groups rather than the overall problems we're all facing. >> guest: i will say this segment is about the demographic so it is hard to avoid ethnicity and race but the is hard to make the case

why a board policy issue should not be boring. they have to make that case to the extent they can to read well but it is hard to answer beyond that. >> do women tend to vote more than men? rick bay do. the specific report we did not do age -- we just did a jan race. >> there is a gender gap that actually happened in the '80s for the first time. >> why? what is that speculation why women are approaching more than men? >> i am not sure what it is. i don't know. it is a good question. >> with your research what is most prevalent reason people give for not voting?

>> there is of great report that was pretty basic and other responses every typical get is they don't like the candidates or politics or reducing future with the issuer's of the people running for office also just to be too busy. >> i think probably a lot of people will say they ran not inspired by candidates. >> one thing we are seeing is alternative methods to become less prevalent but the reasons for not voting you can vote early so i think being too busy is perhaps less of a reason. >> rating we make more impact in local elections says sadly fewer people

participated in those. massachusetts between 18 and 34 years old. >> good morning. >> caller: the reason i am voting i am a hispanic male pay cuts of the first amendment the fourth amendment and the 14th amendment and the equal rights. i strongly believe that social justice will be the issue of the next election if not 2020 and as regeneration end gets older older, that will be the most important issue of our time. and that is why people especially hispanics they feel that they are not wanted by the one-party or to see marco rubio in texas but they told the police of

our community of family family, education to better everyone but not just ourselves of that is why i have always voted. >> host: is this the first of eroding? >> guest: i have noted before. >> has sounds like you have a good listener. >> that challenging thing with young people is to get the mouth the first time. then voting becomes a habit that is the challenge for anybody running for office have redeeming gauge? >> also another point that as these population shifts occur commit is already very important especially on the immigration issue those

issues will be ones that resonate but if you look at the young people but that would lend credence that then you become more engaged >> host: do you vote? >> caller: i am a millennial from misery. --'' misery one of the reason i go to is the issues that matter to me and my generation such as income inequality and education so many young people are graduating college with the mounting levels of debt they find that the jobs are not

there. we are one of the first generations that can look back at their parents who had a better than we do in there is increasing pressure the one candidate that i do see that talks about issues is bernie sanders. he talks about income inequality and taxation and to be educated to compete in the global economy he means the most to me that i have seen. >> host: what moves you? you talked about the issues but to get up and go out and there could be other folks your age or younger who are not motivated? what is it that gets you out?

>> is that it does influence my life. but all these policies with increasing pressure on the generation to influence politics when the standard of living goes down resolved in the 1930's with the greatest generation and they rebuild america. we are by back epicycle with the millenials. >> guest: he sees it not just as issues but for the rest of his life. >> not to go back to the politics but it is hard not to. >> it is hard for elected officials to make the case what they're doing is that especially in the currency environment with a lot of things during space common if you look at the debates

they are ratings and parched it was the only thing on television so it is hard to get people's attention. so for the gentleman that just called but if you're not paying attention it is hard to get someone to pay attention. >> host: menu to say they have now voted because they don't understand the issues so we were going to ask about the influence on the younger folks and what have you learned in the research? do they know what is going on? >> they're not ask how they're getting their knowledge or their opinions it is straight a demographic survey. >> a lot of it is so anecdotal. another thing is that there is a lot of people trying to make the case why they're doing is right in with other people are doing is wrong and don't know that they are

necessarily more attracted by cattle think that is the case. but it is hard when you are young to the gentleman's point, he has all this student debt trying to figure out where he will live and more millenials now live at home despite the economy that the rent is i and job quality and there is all the overlying issues because people are not taking the time to learn about the issues they the to buckle down to do their homework it is and because of older voters with all the different campaign issues but they vote in the same place. >> we will talk about what you mentioned earlier. . .guest: what we call is turning

method is something not happening on election day. what we found is that since 1996, when we started talking about alternative methods, we saw an increase. there is no reason to think it will not grow the future. if more states move that direction, if more states adopt policy then we expect to see it go up. host: do we apply this to him certain age groups? guest: the big questn the big question here and there is a trend receiving a lot of

that clash. in an effort to curtail the early voting hours to restrain early voting hours under the argument that this is a voter protection measure and it is the case that there is very little in person. absentee voter fraud is a more murky issue but the whole thing comes back so you see poor example of error in some places african-american churches do souls to the polls where they get african-americans early voting places and ballots are overwhelmingly democratic and it's one thing that makes republicans nervous so we are seeing is political fight about access to early voting and absentee alice which is not going to go anywhere in the short-term and while it be interesting to see how the trends are pushing back against the political reality. >> guest: we found hispanics at the highest level.

the one exception for blacks is they voted using these alternative motives but they increased in both elections. >> host: connie has been waiting from oklahoma. >> caller: it's the cola. >> host: thank you for explaining that. go ahead area. >> caller: pic olap. >> host: let me write this down. go ahead lease. >> caller: i don't vote and i have not voted but i will vote for him. i think he's an arrogant as as but these politicians have been trying to balance the budget for years and years and they can't seem to do it in they need a businessman in there.

a career politician. >> host: what is your take of a turnout discussion? we have been talking about all kinds of turnout and especially the congressional numbers since 1978 and last year 41.9%. are you getting out of each cycle to vote, connie? >> caller: am i doing what? >> host: are you getting out to vote in each election cycle? >> caller: no i don't vote. i will vote for trumpet to get in there because he's a businessman and i'm tried -- targeting our country to down the tubes. i've been around since 1960 and things are worse. >> guest: what are your reasons for not having voted in the past? >> caller: because the politicians are owned by special interest groups and wall street. they will get up there and tell the american public what they will do lie to us a boldface lie back and then they get up there and do what they want to do in the special-interest groups. our politicians are all owned.

they send money to these foreign countries that hate us. that is crazy. we have troubles here in america. why don't we take care of our people for a change? host of interesting perspective or somebody who said she has never voted before and finding somebody that she likes. >> guest: i will say that i think she sees why donald trump is popular. i don't know some things i think she said i would disagree with for example obviously there's a correlation between people giving checks to politicians and politicians taking meetings with those people. the idea that politician are owned is a little exaggerated but this is again what trump has seized upon this idea that he will go in there and change. he is not beholden to anybody. i don't know that donald trump will end up eating the nominee but i will be fascinated to see if the people who really like trump right now i do say they will vote for him actually do

because one of the questions is that we have seen is how do you get people to vote in the polls and one of the ways you do that is their passion. a lot of people were passionate about rocco obama. i'm curious if i'll trump can inspire folks like the woman from the town whose name we all have trouble with will go to the polls for him. if so that would be significant area. >> host: thom file one more point about connie. is there any sense that somebody might be waiting to vote for the first time and it's extraordinary she was decades beyond when she could have started voting and didn't. >> guest: i think i think attention point that i was recently talking to political scientist at the university of wisconsin and they are trying to get access to our data for a study in their theory is that it matters when you age into a cohort. the argument is if you turn 18

before a national election it will be more likely to not only vote in that election but continue and that comes back to your point about voting being a habit. i thought that was an interesting perspective. it can be that simple. when you become eligible to vote in a national election cycle. >> guest: one of the demographics that you studied did you study by income level? >> guest: we have a wide variety in this report is narrowly focused on demographic components in rehab detailed tables that address all sorts of topics income, education duration of residence is a pivotal indicator for who turns out to vote. it might be counterintuitive but people live in a committee for five years you're voting goes through the rough. maybe you own a house and pay taxes in you are more engaged in the community and across-the-board. >> guest: more practically you

probably know where your polling place is. your voter registration hasn't changed. one of the fights is registration which would increase turnout. motor voter when i pass in the 90s a lot of young people came to the polls there they were registered in the natori about things like that. there were a lot of practicalities to go beyond the school measure. >> host: via twitter people who don't vote cannot complain period. is good to louisiana now come 65 or older. nathaniel, good morning to you. >> caller: good morning. >> host: good morning sir what would you like to say and first you vote currently? >> caller: i have voted since i was able to vote. >> host: what motivates you to get out of? >> caller: the poll tax they are glad when you don't vote.

they'll want you to vote so i've voted ever since i was able in the old enough to vote. >> host: d. have a question or an additional comments? >> caller: yes, i'm one of those guys that says you can't -- [inaudible] i think we have a good resident but if you can't get the people to vote for him and a buddy and wrong about everything and he doesn't get enough people to work with him. we were in a depression come up for some people as a depression. it you've got to get somebody to work with him.

you had people say make him a one-term president and all that kind of stuff. right there instead of working with a man to make happen they work against him. i think he has been a good president. >> host: thank you for calling nathaniel. is there anything you heard that you want to respond to? >> guest: he raised the issue of i believe's father had a poll tax and that the 50th anniversary of the voting rights act having passed its also interesting particularly with the 2008, 2014 same level of nonwhite turnout to think about 50 years ago and think about how dominant white voters were in the electorate and the population at large at how much things have changed since then. >> guest: that era was precisely when the census bureau gathering data. there were concerns ensuring that every american that wants

about testability. >> host: do religious people tend to vote secular? >> guest: i have personal opinions on that. >> guest: is a good question. i wish i had asked the polls in front of me. i couldn't say without looking at the data. >> host: rock the massachusetts 18 to 34. good morning, carol. >> caller: hi good morning. if you could see the looks on their faces with the guy from louisiana before me. it was pretty funny but i just wanted to say that i have not i'm 31 and i have never voted and i will say that because educationwise. i have never had -- wasn't educated in all of the political sides and stuff like that so i figure why should i vote?

by boat for the wrong person then i'm hurting the country. so why do i vote do you know what i mean? and i know i have a 3-year-old son and i have been looking at things differently since obama came into office and i've actually been doing a lot more paying attention and stuff like that but the problem is it's not advertised on tv. i just know that debate was on last night and i wanted to watch it and i didn't see any ever tightening on it. so today i will be planning to watch begin. >> host: do you think you will be voting next time around? >> caller: absolutely. this is my first year and i'm proud of it. i'm proud to know but i will know what i'm voting for. >> host: you mentioned you have a child.

is there any particular issue or group of issues that would bring you out of? >> caller: of course is apparent we want what's best for our children and i think about the future with him growing up. he is on disability temporarily and if that should happen again as he is older for some reason what about what's going on with social security? i think about that and if there was a problem. i want him to be taking care of and i want him to be able to work and that the economy and the way that everything has been wanted to have the opportunities. just like i want everybody to have opportunities. >> host: thank you for calling cara traitor final thought on the study itself?

>> that's a perfect example of getting older. you have a house and you have a family to care about your kids voting goes up. >> guest: i will say too i think a lot of people aren't paying attention to the 2016th cycle yet and presidential cycles tend to get a lot more turnout and engagement. she is watching c-span now a year before the election is a good sign. >> host: here's another look at the study. where can folks on this and we do for themselves? guest:go to census.gov and there's a drop down and go for v for voting and you will see her data going back to the 1960s. >> guest: the census bureau dealing with the education and social stratification and philip bump is a writer for the "washington post" and thom file thank you both for sharing numbers and insight behind the numbers. appreciate your calls to "washington journal" starts everyday at 7:00 eastern

timezone we hope you enjoy the rest of your friday and we hope to see you back here tomorrow morning. have a great day. theodore roosevelt becomes president after the assassination of william mckinley and to accommodate a family first lady e. roosevelt renovates the entire second floor of the executive mansion plus the creation of the west wing. by adding a social secretary to the payroll sheet creates the office of the first lady and changes the name from executive

mansion to the white house. edith roosevelt this sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's original series worst plays includes an image examining the public and private lives of the women who built the division of first ladies in their influence on the presidency from martha washington to michelle obama. sundays at eight a.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3. next to discussion about the effects homelessness and president obama talking about the latest jobs numbers. after that of the white house briefing by secretary josh earnest reacts to senator chuck schumer's announcement that he will not support the iran nuclear agreement. next a look at how homelessness affects people's health and health care options. from a lens for health reform this is an hour and 35 minutes.

>> good afternoon. you should continue to try to find seats and sustenance and we will try to get started here. my name is at howard and i'm at the alliance for health reform and i want to welcome you on behalf of the alliance board of directors are honorary co-chairs senators harden and blunt to today's program on health and housing with an emphasis on the relationship between medicaid and governmental housing problems. the community level at the state level and the federal level as well. this is actually the first in a three-part series that will explore the intersection of health and social policy over the next couple of months.

in october, october 9 we will be looking at how well health services coordinates with nonmedical home and community-based services and then in december we will be examining some of the emerging issues in the connection between health and incarceration which is a growing area of concern and that to betty. there is a connection between health and various social determinants and we will be looking at the nature and the strength of that connection in this briefing and in the subsequent series. some of you may have seen that yesterday new york city mayor bill de blasio announced a 22 million-dollar program to connect more homeless people with mental health care. i think just another sign of growing it to betty at every

level to connect the dots that link better health and better housing so today we are going to shine i hope a lot of white on that topic. our discussion is going to center on how housing stability affects half out comments and health care costs look at what medicaid's role is in addressing this problem and how much flexibility there is in federal policy to allow states and communities to meld housing and health care funding streams and importantly we want to look at what the obstacles might need the just obstacles to making these two program areas more compatible and we are pleased very much to his knowledge support were today's program by one of america's largest private insurers that operates medicaid and other programs in two dozen states i believe.

so before we get to the program let me do a little bit of housekeeping. inner packet there is important mission including speaker biographies one-page materials list and the powerpoint presentations and hard copies you can follow along. there will be a video recording of this briefing available on the alliance web site all health.org probably monday followed by a transcript a few days later along with all of the materials that are in your kids and links to more materials that we think might be help to you. the appropriate time you can ask our panel to question by filling out one of the green cards that are in your packets or you can come to the microphones. there is one on either side of the room. you can use the hashtag health and housing to tweet us

questions or to tweak generally and if you're watching on c-span and want to ask a question you can also tweak the question. we will be keeping an eye on this and having them brought forth for the panel to respond to. at the end of the briefing there is a lula valuation form in your packets that i very much appreciate your filling out so that we can improve these briefings and target them to the needs of the folks who come and need guidance. enough of that let's hear from our well-informed panel. i'm going to give them an adequate introductions and i will do it serially so that they won't disrupt the flow of the discussion as we go along. we are going to start on my far left with barbara sub or the director of policy at the

national -- barbara dipietro active in health care for the homeless of maryland so she has got a multilevel perspective on how to deal with these problems. we would ask barbara to highlight the connection between health care and housing in general why it's important and the opportunities on the state federal and local levels to address it. then we will hear from jennifer ho senior adviser to hud secretary julian castro and she will explain the current federal activities and describe how her agency and others are collaborating on health and housing issues. gretchen hammer district of colorado's policy and housing and colorado's medicaid and chip or grams. we have asked gretchen to tell us about colorado's housing policy and what gets in the way

of those efforts and our final panelist's sister adele o'sullivan a family physician and she's the founder of circle the city which is a phoenix nonprofit that brings private and public sectors together to help those experiencing homelessness and illness. sister adele will describe the supportive housing model and what gets in the way. so we have come to the part of the program that has got substance to it and that is to say barbara dipietro it. >> thank you so much. really appreciate so many people being here today. i think it really is a testament to a growing awareness about health care is changing in our country and awareness of the importance of the determinants of health and in particular the impact of housing has on people's health status. the national health care for the

homeless council we were present qualified health centers in the homeless patients they serve particularly the special populations health centers, the 250 nationally. over a million patients are being seen and america's health centers each year and the depth and breadth of their needs specifically because of their lack of housing is an issue for not only health centers but the larger health care industry we are looking to change. one of the things that might not be intuitive is how housing is health care. back in the 80s the institute of medicine did a study looking at that very impact and they found three major findings. one is that poor health causes homelessness so typically what we were seeing was a spiral of people who had an injury or an illness unable to work and when you are unable to work eventually the work goes away and you get tired or laid off or you can no longer bring in

income. pretty soon after that you can't make rent or mortgage. you move in with family and friends and pretty soon that doesn't work out well and you slide into a shelter situation. we were seeing that regularly. we also see that converts that that -- converse. you can imagine living on the street or in a shelter is stressful and if he didn't have issues before you would develop issues when you were homeless. it's very difficult to live on the street and be exposed to extremes of weather cold and hot without getting hospitalizations. high blood pressure, the one or stressed that the three western housing you will be stressed out afterward. depression and alcoholism and mental health issues of all kinds tend to -- or they get exacerbated. you also tend to think about lack of housing complicates

treatment. we are putting billions of dollars into our health care industry every year. none of that funding works well and efficient as health care providers. nothing that we do works well with someone living on the street grid every time we turned somebody through 90-day recovery treatment and we get somebody into behavioral health treatment they need only to discharge them to the street we have complicated and compromise the treatment. when we discharge people from our hospitals to a shelter or to the streets the inpatient stay that we just paid for the wound care we have just paid for is now compromised. these are the things that are bundled up together in the intersection of health and housing. we really need to appreciate how we can rectify that. one of the things we are seeing as we represent the doctors and

nurses and addiction counselors and case managers in the work force that is behind caring for these patients and what we see not surprisingly are high rates of it committed bold diseases respiratory illnesses all the things you would expect from cuts getting infected. the rate at which we were placed medication is astronomical because of the rate that they are stolen. when he can't keep things safe, when he can keep your medications refrigerated is difficult to maintain compliance with your health care. how many times has anybody gone to the doctor and had a prescription given to them that may cause them to visit the bathroom more often? that's just not possible. no need for a show of hands but that's just not possible when many places don't afford home

homeless people in opportunity to use the bathroom so what we see is higher rest rates for things like living your private life and public can be extremely indecent. we have local ordinances increasingly that criminalize that activity. we see as health care providers are clients client came in and said didn't take that medication because otherwise i would be arrested or didn't have anyplace to go or my needles were stolen or it's not safe for me to have needles. this is what we hear. so when we look at the literature the literature shows people who are homeless who have acute chronic disease three to six times what everyone else has. like everyone else we have asthma diabetes hypertension and high cholesterol and heart disease and the rest of everybody else has but still at higher rates. we see a lot of intensive need to coordinate this care and receive extremes of the use of

the health care system. we are getting a lot of attention and a frequent user high-end user putting a lot of money into a small number of people that we need to stabilize but we also see people living on the outskirts of our society who avoid our health care system but have intensive needs usually in a mental health and substance abuse treatment area. how was it that we are reaching those people that are fragile and in need of care? when we look at our hospital system hospitals are really strapped. what are you supposed to do when you have no safe discharge option for a client is ready for discharge? is illegal to discharge the street but as with anything else we get discharge. what you do for someone who doesn't have a place to go? these are the real issues that local health care systems are struggling with finding capacity so we can be safe and ethical treatment for people. we also see a lot of people were

when they are ill it's difficult to get back out of homelessness. working on housing and work in and getting a job. if you are fighting your addiction or mental health it's hard to get out of a shelter or off the street. one example of how when a health center population people who are homeless have disproportionately high rates of any disease you can imagine. that brings us to supportive housing. when we think about what a supportive housing typically it is helpful to think about it in terms of attrition additional model that emphasizes recovery first printers owner 20s we require people to get clean and sober and require people to enter into treatment and be successful before we get them into housing unit. if everyone follows the rules and you continue to follow the rules maybe one day you can be an independent house and while that certainly works for some rigid work for people who have serious health care