retrieve the existing textbooks we get those back. the center is going to have a very broad range from social media to broadcast, to how young e moms are trained and we are working with them today to establish the new center, what are the measures we will hold our self accountable to. that is the charge the state department is working as we bring this up to an operating level. >> without objection we stand in recess. we will return at approximately 1230.

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] >> the committee will reconvene at this time and we will begin with questioning from mr. -- from california. >> thank you mr. chairman and mr. secretary for your patience and reconvening. this is a tough day today. it's thanks to the capital police and the men and women that not only protect us but all across this country protect the men and women protecting who we are.

i've's said this in committee, a world by leadership is a better world and we can see that in the second half of the 20th century and post-world war ii. america leadership meeting with our values and morals has created a better world. most around the world recognize that. that has been predicated on the form policy plank that has three legs. certainly our defense, but also development and diplomacy. my concern with this budget is that it cuts off to those legs of the stool will collapse. it devastates the budget. i noticed that your budget mr. secretary, but as members of congress who have a responsibility for setting priorities i have great concerns

and can talk about a number of various that i find very troublesome. i'm a physician by training with public health a global health background. and have deep reservations about some of the cuts to our global health development. some of the cuts to usaid. particularly a 15% cut to maternal and child health programs. that's worrisome. the impact those cuts have around the world. i think america is a great nation. but a great nation leads by our values and morals. we do not withdraw from the world. my concern is that if the cuts go into effect the number of women that will suffer in the number of women that will die. i think some of the cuts with regards to a potential billion-dollar production on the

zeroing out of family planning funds will have devastating impacts. i have read the testimony of senator shaheen discussing mexico city policy and i heard your answer to that that your office would be studying the impact of the extension of the global gag rule. can you give us assurances that when you get the report back if we are seeing adverse impacts that you would make recommendations to reverse that policy? >> thank you for the attention to that particular matter i cannot commit to you that i would seek a reversal of that policy as i explained to senator shaheen yesterday our implementation was structured in a way that the engagement with

their health partners to mitigate any affect on their activities. he said we do six months check in one provision i left off is if it is impacting any particular areas of our healthcare we did not attend than in consultation with the secretary of hhs i as secretary of state can issue waivers and allow funding to continue. the reason we want to do in the six-month check is to see what we do have. >> we you commit to providing us the results of the report and what you find? >> i be happy to show that i also have real reservations about the impact it has started by the president and has been remarkable, saving thousands if not hundreds of thousands of lives in africa.

i think president bush would suggest that is his proudest accomplishment. i would like to hear for their commitment as we hear how we engage in global health around the world with partnerships. i understand it's our responsibility to evaluate the program but i like to have this commitment that we will look at how we work with nonprofits around the world to continuing suffering. >> that is a fundamental to our approach even with the 1 billion cut we will continue to be the leader in health issues nobly. it is clearly recognized as a model program that should be replicated elsewhere. >> we will go now to mr. paul cook vice chairman of the

committee of california. >> it's good to see you again. >> i miss some of the testimony and i hope i'm not being redundant. i want to talk about the muslim brotherhood, the impact in qatar, and quite frankly turkey in the strained relationship and how it is so difficult to find out one day you have an ally in the next an adversary i know that is going to be challenging with the saudi's and what is happened in the past few weeks. as well as the ongoing political situation in turkey which affects the middle east in our policy. if you could address that i would appreciate that. i talked to last night about the same thing and secretary mattis had input on it monday night. it is one that doesn't

necessarily have a military solution but you will be right in the eye of the storm. >> our relationship with turkey is six extremely important to the united states and to nato, europe and clearly we are concerned about the evolution of events particularly since the coup attempt in turkey i have traveled take her. her level of engagement with turkey is at a high level of communication and engagement. where we haven't from questions or concerns were discussing it. were talking about how we can defeat isis. we are concerned about their engagements with russia, the european union is concerned about their relationships. it's an important place geographically but also

politically. it's an important relationship quite complex right now. our objective is not to worse than that but to reengage and strengthen it so we can have some influence over the choices they're making with respect to the freedoms of the country to continuing their role in their construct is a democracy. >> thank you for yielding. i would ask you about your thought about waivers for the mexico city policy i would hope you would not go that route. that would have the perverse impact of incentivizing for nongovernmental organizations to be noncompliant with the mexico city policy. back in 1985 at the ronald

reagan first announced the policy since mean, there were large numbers of foreign ngos that said we are not going to comply. i offered the amendment in 1985 which passed and i fully expects will have it all out on the floor again which i would welcome with the policy that seeks to home harmless unborn children. it ought to be inclusive not exclusive of unborn children who we know now the under reasonable doubt are harmed in a way that is violence against children. abortion is violence against children and it also has consequences. we also track what ronald reagan did and george w. bush did ambush one when he initiated the

policy as well. at the end of the day when it's only applied to family organizations when i offer the amendment on the floor other said none of the groups are going to accept it. at the end of the day, all but two accepted it. that was i pbs based out of london and -- international. i would encourage you that waivers would be an incentive to a foreign, nongovernment organization. we have shown clearly they did not want foreign aid subsidizing children overseas or anywhere else. i just would offer that pot. >> we go now to lois of florida. >> thank you and welcome

mr. secretary of state. today's the day where we all recognize our common humanity is my thoughts are with my colleague and other folks impacted by the shooting. i'll try to be kind and gentle. in a very kind and gentle way i want to say that is said to say think your budget is inhumane and dangerous. okay, i had to say that. i don't want to turn this into an abortion fight because that was not part of my remarks. i want to counter my colleague why respect very much and just say that women having full access to reproductive choice and care is imperative for them to have a full and productive life. i think it's important to the security of their community. i'm going to move on. i want to mention i remember the

president said that he inherited a mess when it came to international affairs. it's perplexing that he says that the new come in with a budget with a one third cut. over 120 retired air force general sent a letter opposing the cuts send this is not the time to retreat. secretary mattis when he was commander said if you don't fully fund the state department then i need to buy more ammunition. i guess this is the trump doctrine because he's putting billions more into ammunition and cutting two of the legs are national security which is diplomacy and development. i want to focus on what i think is one of the crown jewels of our development efforts that is

global health investment. i know you would probably agree diseases do not recognize international borders. every year almost 80 million people from other countries visit the united states and americans took more than -- international trips. we have military living overseas. u.s. global assistant helps not only to protect people in other countries but protect the united states. i hope you would agree these health initiatives help keep country stable. when you have famine, if you have disease, you have inhumane conditions, it promotes not only

people trying to escape the country but it destabilizes countries and creates an environment for terrorism. george bush, one of his great achievements was -- which put us on track to and eight by 2030. i know you have said it's a model for the world to follow. yet the president's budget cuts it by $1 million. the global fund also that is getting cut by $225 million. no people say why should we care what is happening. i think that's one of the questions i want to ask you. why should we care about diseases and other countries? >> i think you just gave the

explanation. >> that's what i would point to come i know you're focused on the cuts. >> i think it's also important to focus on how much we will still be committing and spending towards diseases and global health efforts. were not zeroing help out. these were difficult choices that were made in the budget. we believe we can attract others another funding. and enable continuation of the programs. there's no stepping back from our commitment we will fully meet the commitments were fully meeting our commitments, we do not intend to abandon our efforts or abandon our view of how important these issues are. >> thank you mr. secretary. >> thank you for being here.

a few questions to ask about iran. there's a lot of agreement that iran has violated the agreement of the jcpoa. have you seen evidence that iran has violated the letter of the jcpoa? >> we will await the quarterly report to see if they have found any specific violations. i have read the entire agreement for myself so i can understand the spirit and intent. quite frankly it is a poorly constructed agreement. the bar for iran's compliance is pretty low. it should not come as a surprise that they can comply, it's not that difficult for them to comply. having said that, we intend a rigorous application and

rigorous confirmation from my aei that they are compliant. the whole spirit and intent question is one that is open to interpretation by both sides and remember the jcpoa is a multilateral agreement so we have partners on our side of the table. they will have their interpretation of that as well. >> your predecessor pointed out that it was a political commitment, it was in the treaty, it was a political commitment, one that we did not ask for a signature on. does the administration recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel? >> they have not expressed a specific view in that regard. >> i believe strongly that the administration should recognize jerusalem as the on -- capital

of israel. will they eventually move the embassy to jerusalem? >> that's under evaluation by the president. he will have to make a decision on whether to extend a final decision on that. >> the president was absolutely correct during the campaign when he stated his position and intent of moving the embassy. i would encourage him to go up his instinct from the campaign and follow through with the pledge. >> i think the engagement with them in making clear on their expectation of how aid is utilize one thing i would like to clarify several times in the question people suggested our support that they were

increasing next year, that is inaccurate. it is going down about $20 million if i remember correctly. to remind everyone are a does not go directly, it's given to them by way of israel. we were closely with them with how that is delivered. >> i appreciate that point. i would offer that whatever the united states cannot do to the palestinian authority legally we should also have the position that we also cannot do for the palestinian authority indirectly. i cosponsor the taylor for sect in a number of my colleagues in the house and senate to as well. i believe one has bipartisan support that we should better leverage the aid that is provided for the authority which

includes them not inciting violence the palestinians are not only inciting violence on the part to target innocent israelis but they're doing so to target americans as well. >> just so you're clear, it was with that strong bipartisan sense of the congress that we have taken the position in a very unequivocal way that you either take care of this yourself or someone else will take care of it for you. those are the words i have used with them. >> you have strongly stated that includes recent statements where you mention the president brought this up that you have received assurances. it is in the news today that there are officials pushing back on your position that the authority has agreed to stop

providing these two reward terror. i wish you the absolute best to secretary of state. the to talk to for their bout those efforts moving forward in the weeks, months, and years ahead. >> we go now to mr. castro of texas. >> thank you chairman and thank you secretary for being here today. cooperation between congress and state department is important. i'm concerned over what looks like a lack of cooperation with the executive. the policy has not been completely aligned over the last several months. there minutes after you stated they hindered military action against isis that president trump took to twitter to praise the blockade. then president trump called north korean leader a smart cookie and said he would be

honored to meet him hurting your efforts. your efforts to ensure commitments where alliances have been undercut by the white house and the president. it was reported that when prime minister netanyahu the president trump stood up at the press conference looked at the idea of a one state solution instead of a two state that you are at an air plate somewhere else the state department was not part of those discussions. my question is, how cannot americans around the world have confidence in your work and most of all that it represents what president trump leaves? >> just to be clear, there is no get between the president myself for the state department policy. there are differences in terms of how the president chooses to

articulate that. and evidence of the qatar example i attended a by that with the president of romania and then he made his statement of the rose gardens. i was involved in writing his comments in the rose garden to reflect the message he wanted to send which was to everyone, to all countries to stop the funding and killing. step teaching your young people hate. that was the way he wanted to deliberate. >> there is no daylight between him and i. jared kushner has been given a big portfolio with respect to foreign affairs. who is responsible for foreign affairs of our countries? the department of the state and yourself. >> the department of state myself and that is been reconfirmed by the president to

me on multiple occasions. >> part of the reason i ask is in february i was in japan and south korea. this is the biggest question people have. when we look to the united states who speaks for the president reliably? whose work can we trust? >> i know you can understand how important that is for allies so why would the state department be left out of any discussion about one of our most important policy issues whether you have a one state or two state solution. >> eat i think that came out of the bilateral private meeting between the president and i think to be fair what the president was indicating is that whatever approach the two sides,

the palestinians and israelis want to take to achieve a peace accord, we will support. he was saying were prepared in his prepared to put his shoulder to the wheel to see if we can move the process along. he is going to be on constraint of exploring alternatives. because with their pursuit for so many years have not produced a result. . .

the more thoughtfulness from the executive branch on how they approach these things. >> good seeing you again. appreciate you being here. as we talked there were 25 conflicts around the world and d dictatorindicators over 75 and o shortages of challenges. i see great things in store for you, the nation and the world. some of the colleagues are not accepting the fact we are $20 trillion in debt. we have reports of where we will be in five to six years.

they get the results that we are looking for and get rid of the programs that are not working. we are with chairman royce and i remember sitting there at the table with the ministers. we were going around talking about things and i asked the people at the table and keep in mind we've given hundreds of millions of dollars. they asked me what do you mean and i said feeding the hungry, housing, healthcare and he said we have you. those aren't good programs and we need to reform them and put pressure on those countries. the comment president trump said make america great again, put america first, i believe in that

and i think it is taken out of context because the only way we can become great or first at whatever we do this to look out for the partners we are working with. that comes from diplomacy in the agency, and i have a lot of confidence in the business acumen you can transfer those and i've watched since you came in and i am a big fan of what you can do. i know we are in separate branches of government. look at this committee. i chair the subcommittee that we talked about on how we can partner together to work on the commonalities and with that as you know yesterday panel terminated the diplomatic relationships with taiwan and its the latest effort to restrict the international space and including the blockade of the delegation of the world health assembly. to me this is unconscionable to say to another nation and other

people said they are a nation i recognize and i know it is in a tough situation because we've had the policy since president nixon. but saying that and china says they will be a reliable partner to bring them to the table. when we look at what china has done, they've increased the trade with north korea in the first quarter and the chinese imports have increased 270% in january and february coming at no firms have been subjected to sanctions. can we realistically rely on china in lieu of their past experience or actions? >> the north korea policy went into effect in march when we begin to execute that and so we recognized there was a lot of

activity going on in the first quarter and that's what we have been trying to attack. the recognize what china is having to put pressure on the countries using the power of the trading relations and the power of the aid that they've provided and then the trip to australia, new zealand and the meetings i've had with members. we are hearing this directly from them that they are not only feeling this pressur pressure ts being put right in front of them to say you either set sever their relationships will end with you. even the large countries are being threatened in this way. the conversations at the next 50 years is to build prosperity and we are being clear to them you are destabilizing what has been a staple relationship with these actions. if this is what you are doing

you were going to create instability and take this balance is maintained in the period of non- conflict and you are going to upset that balance. so those are the kind of high-level discussions we are having in the senior levels of the chinese leadership. you have to think about where does this go and what are you going to force as the response to that. i hope that we stay in honor of the taiwan relations act as we have in the past. thank you. the hearing will conclude at 1:30. the secretary has been very flexible and does deliver the commitments. so, if the members will be not compelled to use their full-time

we want to get everyone a chance and we will go to robin kelly of illinois. >> thank you for coming to the house foreign affairs committee. i believe to appear before the committee so i thank you for that. the official mission statement of the state department reads the mission is to shape and sustain a peaceful prosperous just and democratic world and foster conditions for stability and progress for the benefit of the american people and people everywhere. in the testimony you stated the primary focus is to protect our citizens at home and abroad and to me that sounds more like the mission of the defense department and state department. so has the mission of the state department changed somewhat under president trump? >> it is one that is very powerful and i would certainly support. having said that it was a

statement developed under previous administrations. part of the redesign opportunity we have in front of us was there is some confusion over the mission and the confusion doesn't just exist today, it's existed for some time. we do owe it to ourselves with the input and help and hope to do a better job of articulating. what is the mission of the state department regardless of what political party they be in any given time because the state department is constant. we understand the american people change and can change from one to the next but the state department must have a mission that delivers regardless of what the policy decisions may be that change from time to time and that is a conversation we need to have with ourselves in

spite of the state department and colleagues and that is the mission statement i am in search of is what will endure regardless of who may be occupying the white house. >> i agree with what my colleagues said about the budget cuts and the recent article of the two distinguished military leaders cited the cuts as risking u.s. national security and they go on to specifically say that in the 21st century they are insufficient to keep america safe. i was asked to submit the article into the record. i also have concerns about the staffing because that would help you do the job. is there a backlog of policy recommendations now because of the rapid staffing?

>> i want to recognize every job is filled today either the deputy to be the acting assistant and acting assistant stepped up to be under if necessary. i have a lot of conversations about how i know it is difficult to be the acting but they are doing a superb job and i have great confidence in them. these are the people that helped me develop the policy. they are executing the policy and giving a doing an extraordi. >> i will yield back the time. >> thank you mr. secretary. do you have any plans to bring a reset button? >> i don't think that you can reset anything. we are where we are and have to address the conditions as they

exist. do you anticipate president trump whispering in the ear saying there would be more flexibility? >> i wouldn't expect any intent than to try to restore the relationship to something in the interest of the american people. >> do you anticipate marking the threat of the influence by saying the 1980s when their foreign policy back? >> we will be articulating our own view towards russia which i have some respects today. we take the relationship seriously. they are a global nuclear power. having said that, we have a number of troubling issues with them in front of us to deal with. >> is there any level of funding that can make up for the actions like that? >> it will be hard work of diplomacy coupled with some

strong actions that have been taken already and the prospect that the congress can enable us to do if we cannot get a progress. do you believe it is more important the words and actions you will undertake than any level you try to meet? >> it is not an absence of funds that is in any way preventing us from continuing to work where we may find cooperation to build trust and confidence. funding is not an issue. >> we will go now to ms. titus of nevada. >> i share my colleagues concerns about the devastating budget cuts and also the lack of senior leadership at the state department. i don't see how we can move forward and a leadership role

with those kind of problems hanging over us but i want to go over the questions that mr. castro raised. i don't believe our country has a singular voice when it comes to foreign policy and that concerns our allies and also emboldens the adversaries because nobody knows who to believe. he mentioned several examples, the incident that occurred recently, the peace talks in the middle east but i would like to bring up a couple of others. you are not part of the discussion to withdraw from the past climate agreement and i believe you said you are opposed to that and that we should not have done that. i would like to ask you why you think that this was a bad idea and is there any way with all of their limited funds we can move forward in any way as a leader on climate change? the second one is in the written statement you say the u.s., and i quote, will continue to be the leader in international development, global health, democracy initiatives and

humanitarian efforts that the president said we don't really care about what other countries are doing internally. only how they relate to us. it is not up to us to interfere. we are not here to tell other people how to live or who to be. would you tell us how about applies to what you've said? >> with the decision to withdraw from the paris climate i was part of the interagency process. what i would point out to you this is a decision the president could have taken the first week after inauguration. he clearly indicated in the campaign that he intended to. i think it is noteworthy he took some time to think about it. he deliberated on it and we had a couple of different sessions with them. he waited until he took his first overseas trip and attended so he could hear directly from others on the issues and then he came home and had one more to liberation on the telephone

conference call which i participated in. i was free to express my views and i took a counter view to the decision wa that was made, but i fully appreciate the elements on why he took the decision. >> can you tell us why you have a counter position and don't think it was a good idea to pull out of? >> as i've expressed, i think having our seat at the table around the paris climate accord to continue to have influence on the issue itself continue to represent america's efforts because america has done an extraordinary job of dealing with our greenhouse gas emissions without the heavy-handed regulation and just because we have walked away from the targets that were sent under paris is in no way our intent to walk away from that continued improvement. i think americans, businesses, private and public enterprises have no intent of changing that

commitment so it is an opportunity for engagement and i take every opportunity i can. this is very important to many of our allies and that is the reason i argued for staying. >> i have a second plant -- >> i think what the president was indicating if he is not into changing governments. what he's advocating is mistakes have been made in the past by involving ourselves in the country and then expanding to want to change the culture and the heritage and the way they live their lives and i think what he was saying is there is a lot of conflict to be created when we try to go too far in

imposing our way of life on others. it's the history, the culture and not create new areas of conflict just because we think that they should be doing things differently. i think that is the intent and there is a lot of merit in that and a lot of conflicts around the world on how did we get there and why did they exist. a lot of it is grounded in these areas. we continue to believe that if we de- conflict areas and bring peace to areas they have a much better chance of engaging on many things like human rights, freedom, democracy, which we want -- >> my time is up. so after we go in and of the war is over we don't have any responsibility for giving any nationbuilding, that's okay. >> mr. secretary, thank you for

your service and leading the private industry to serve the country. as a person in and out of the state department for many years but has had commercial relationships with international development, i want to thank you for bringing a businesslike approach to funding the departments. what you said is true it is about what you can accomplish and what you have and not necessarily what you spent to get there. let the record reflect the department spent over $29 million to subsidize an organization you and i know personally in the economic forum. i wonder what the taxpayer would think of that and i want to applaud you for scrapping the disaster known as the u.s. institute of peace. if every taxpayer out from florida to california could see that building would have a revolt on our hands and last i wish he would reconsider the $10 million you got in for the human rights council that's on top of the 17.5 million we spent in the last few years to try to with israel but i will bet you a steak dinner isn't going to work

so i guess i just want to know what can we do to agree with you to have your back and encouraged you to reinforce your efforts to bring reform to eliminate wasteful spending and position the department to work effectively in the 21st century. >> thank you for the support we've all ready received in the congress and the input which is important to have an understanding of what the priorities are in the minds of the congress and the house because you are closest to the face of the american people and i recognize that. in terms of these international organizations, we are looking at the onthough one by one and reay asking ourselves what is the cost benefit here. and in some areas, we are either going to reform those or withdraw from them. and we actually are using this

exercise and everyone is well aware of what you're going through taking a close look at what do we, the american people get in return for this investment or funding that we provided and that is not as a threat but a couple to understand this is a serious conversation we need to get to a serious conclusion. if you don't want to reform, that's fine just let us know and we will try a different approach. the human rights council is one we are currently engaged in. she and i spoke about where to reform this thing to make it reflect what it should be reflecting or we will withdraw our support and try to find other means that we can approach the human rights issues on a multilateral basis with partners who see it the same way we do. >> thank you mr. secretary i. will yield back my time. >> thank you mr. chairman and

welcome, thank you for staying as long as you have and accommodating the tough day today. i understand later this week you are traveling to miami for a conference about security and prosperity in central america specifically the northern triangle area. i want to make you aware we in congress have been working very hard on a bipartisan way to deal with the crisis we have in this area and i want to make sure you understand while the president may not think we should be building up other governments, the national security is very dependent on the democracy issue is within the neighbors to the south. we have to be proactive dealing with the government that has become the culture of our

neighbors. we have to deal with the narco trafficking issues and money laundering that happens because they are our partners, so thank you for making a commitment to working. but i want to make sure you understand this is important to congress and if we pass the resolution unanimously here in congress. the world looks at the united states for leadership on the global stage. unfortunately, the president's words and actions have been undermining american leadership. part of the problem is we do not have a fully staffed functioning state department. another problem is that there is a conflict of mixed messages that come across when the president meets and the press team has a different response. mr. secretary, my question to

you is are the presidents as it message is the official policy of the united states? >> i'm not going to comment extensively. the president has his own means he wishes to communicate and he communicates a lot of different messages. >> i understand that, but either it is an informed decision based on facts. and is this our policy, u.s. policy? >> i'm not involved and how he constructs them, what or where. >> it seems to be a game that goes back and forth. this isn't meant to be a gotcha question. this is simply wanting to clarify for other world leaders. i would suggest on a trip to mexico with a delegation of u.s. members of congress and part of

the infectivity with our closest neighbor to the south is the fact that the president put out messages and people don't know. these leaders don't know if that's an informed policy and if it is truly how the united states intends to conduct business. what i would say with our neighbors to the south in mexico you mentioned at the conferencei will be going to tomorrow to address both economic and security issues in the triangle area. this conference is being cosponsored by the state department, department of homeland security, mexican counterparts, foreign ministry and minister of mexico. this is something that came out of the mexico city engagement because we recognized we have a common issue in the transmigration that is a problem for mexico and a problem for us and what we are doing this gets to our approach in the budget

question and then concerned we are not going to be able to carry out a foreign-policy objectives these are some of the innovative approaches we are taking bringing the inter-american bank, world bank and a number of private-sector institutes to miami. the vice president is coming to give the keynote address. >> do you know who is not coming and it's not because you didn't invite them to the attorneys and the generals of all three countries are not coming simply because the government thinks there is instability happening in the usa but they've left them out and i think it's important at this conference that we call them out on that. >> as you know a lot of our systems in those countries is to strengthen the law enforcement and the ability of attorney generals to prosecute and the courts to make the cases stick on corruption in particular. we have made progress and the reason we are focusing on the triangle area is because we've made progress. we think we are very close to

pushing this over the hump so to speak and we want to bring in a lot of others to help with this so that we are not doing it alone. >> i want to thank the secretary for his time in the committee. this has been a challenging day in congress. it's a tough world out there. i want to reiterate that and think the secretary for speaking here today and sharing your times are generously. on behalf of those that are not able to ask questions, we may sub them to you and get a response. >> i'm sorry we were not able to have a dialogue with each of you as well and again i understand the circumstances entirely. as i said at the beginning of the hearing, that is absolutely something we will do and i do want to convey on behalf of the members here, the committee

looks forward to working with you, mr. secretary on many policies including the reorganization efforts and have heard our concerns. we look forward to receiving the latest proposals for the department's reorganization once they are ready. again i thank you for being prepared to respond to the other members that did not get an opportunity here today. thank you and we stand adjourn adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

a look at nuclear security

interview with david roosevelt, grandson of fdr and eleanor as he talks about his memoir a personal history of eleanor roosevelt from his home on the roosevelt hyde park estate. >> it really was not until my grandmother's funeral that i realized that she was really a

special person, and something of a celebrity. we never thought of her in that way. we never viewed my grandmother. she was only a grandmother to us. and that is all she ever wanted it to be. >> then tony and his book "fdr and the post office." >> i found four letters in the archive in his handwriting not type and that actually credited stamp collecting with saving his life after he became ill and ended up confined to a wheelchair. >> the first presidential library in the national archive system. >> established by franklin roosevelt he was looking for a way to preserve the papers of his administration and his personal papers and so, he

created a library on the grounds here at hyde park new york. basically what he decided to do is raise private money to build the library and then he gave it to the government to be operated by the national archives. >> watch the cities to her saturday at noon eastern on c-span2 book tv. and sunday on american history tv on c-span three. working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. the arms control association held its annual meeting to discuss issues of nuclear security and arms control policy. this portion looks at the nuclear weapons nonproliferation treaty and its next review conference scheduled for 2020. this is 90 minutes.