rights. so you raised the issue of free speech and digital privacy, but the situation arises for us, for example, when somebody wants to picket, outside an abortion clinic. we believe in the right to picket and we believe in the right to reproductive choice and the right to access reproductive choice. it occurs to us that race i rises, arises when the press wants to pub lislish a defendan claim and jeopardizes his trite a fair trial in front of the fair jury and we over the years have tried to work out those conflicts and sometimes we have tweaked the solutions as time goes on, we give more thought to the problem, but it's a genuine problem, and it can't be avoided, and do you the best that -- you do the best that you can. i will say, just one last thing on the whole issue of digital privacy. the aclu over its history has

been primarily concerned with invasions of the individual rights by the government. i mean, not exclusively so. we support laws like title 7 which say private corporations cannot discriminate on the basis of race. but it is perfectly clear that there's at least as much threat to digital privacy now coming from the googles and the facebooks of the world as from the united states government, and we're all going to have to think about how to balance those rights as we move forward eechlgts wanted to pick up on the health care piece of this, i wouldn't have expect wide have. i'm teaching constitutional law to the 1l students. i made my students read the entire argument last week, which i know they enjoyed thoroughly. >> 80 pages? >> well, the first 80 pages of tuesday. yeah. >> mean the first half of tuesday? >> that's right. yeah. didn't even make them read the

last part. >> just an hour. >> exactly. exactly! i let them off so easy. the point is, right, so it's fascinating to me to see this case framed as, as it has been, i think, publicly, right, as an individual of rights against individual rights cases at some level. right? and right on the other side is, you can't force me to buy health insurance, as it's been framed, sort of, by the plaintiffs' side, and you saw some of the most dramatic moments in the supreme court debate and in public debate as well. this notion that, why should the government be able to tell me, right to take my money and give it essentially to somebody else? i don't want to buy health insurance. i shouldn't have to buy health insurance you are you're using my money to subsidize somebody else's cares, at least in the first instance, and so -- so the answer, right, that the government council gives to this is, yes, in is is what the

government does every time it taxes people. this is exactly the power to tax to which the plaintiffs say, well, yes, but you didn't call this a tax. you called this a penalty, and if, if only you had called this a tax, then it would be okay. right? so what's the argument there? the health care bill would be okay if you put the letters, t-a-x on the title of the provision, and then the plaintiffs would say, we have no issue, as a question of government power. so you question them, there's a real argument there. the argument is, right, well, they couldn't have known. it wasn't clear enough to the public what congress was doing. they were trying to sneak it in, because they thought it was politically easier to pass as a penalty than as a tax. and the political process won't work if the voters don't know. can't evaluate, right what they're really getting. that argument works sometimes. right? if the government's doing things in secret, if it's addressing laws to a discreet and insular

minority. inserting some writer to some random committee bill some giant authorization bill -- the health care law, right, is the most heavily democratically processed law we've had in the last 20 years. right? you would have had to have been living under the rock not to know exactly what this bill was doing. right? so the argument that, gee, individuals couldn't effectively vote out there members, if they didn't like this law, couldn't affectively vote for a different president in november, because they didn't know that this was really about taxing and not penalties? this is not an example of a case where there's a political process bill, where you need the courts. right? either the court decides it in june or the voters decide it in november, but there's every reason to think the voters know exactly what was going on when it was passed and know plenty enough to vote against it, if they don't like it, without the court's endorsement. >> got to let adam in on this. >> it's much poor complicated to

get into, but deborah demonstrated the general academic view of how the case was and would come out, should come out, and that's not what we saw at the court at all. the court thought that the argument that making people engage in a commercial transaction with a private company is fundamentally different from paying taxes to the government and getting something in return. but i really wanted to make a point to follow-up and maybe come fill circle as ppolarizati. one they aclu is not polarizing, at the supreme court a testament to steve's leadership. the briefs in party cases and when they file briefs as a amiky are really read with care and i say that in a setting where emeka's are not read with care. you're lucky if a law clerk reads your amicus brief, but i know that in chambers on the liberal and conservative sides the handful of outside groups

who's amicus briefs get read among the aclu, because they come from a certain perspective, but they're credible and trusted, and i think that is really a testament to a really smart legal shop. >> a last word i. would just say this, i want to thank everyone for joining us and all of you here, and especially those who pushed back heather, especially you and ted in your gentle, kind way. [ laughter ] >> and i would just say this. i mean, for those who absolutely disagree with the aclu would never have given their time. heather was incredibly generous to give of her time to come and engage us in decision. those who won't give us the time of day, i want to switch the channel off to c-span, i'd just say this, the context of today's panel was, you know, the aclu in american life. the question you have to ask

yourself what would american life be like without aclu? and one didn't exist, would america be the worst for it? and i know that the answer in my mind is, yes. america would be worse for it, if we didn't exist. we'd have to create one. and even if you never supported us or believe in our work, these issues are much too weighty to be silent bystanders. if we do anything right it is just to get kind of the far republican right wing part of america saying, well, what is the aclu doing advocating on behalf of citizens united states? get they are light bulbs to sparkle and see, how can i possibly agree with the aclu on this issue? that maybe there's a teachable moment for all of is and that american life is all the better when we have these debates, that democracy can about great many thing, but it should never be quiet and our job is to be as loud and noisy as possible. so thank you to jeffrey and to all of you for joining us.

>> let me, i said at the beginning, this is a huge subject along the way it became clear every one of these issues we could spend a lot of time on and debate. but we got to a lot more than i actually thought and i appreciate the four students for their questions, all of the panelists, thank you very much. thanks again to cardozo for having me about i hope you enjoyed it. thanks very much. [ applause ] just over 30 years ago president reagan nom bated sandra day o'connor to be the first woman opt supreme court.

today on c-span2, justice o'connor retired talks to the three women who followed her to the court. it will be live on c-span2 starting at 6:30 eastern. republican presidential candidates machine maria and newt gingrich speak at the national rifle association's annual meeting friday. also addressing the nra, house majority leader eric cantor, texas governor rick perry and scott walter live on c-span friday starting at 2:00 p.m. eastern. martin luther king is a man of all the people i've met and talked with and spent time with over the years, is a man that i most -- the american individual that i admire most of all. of all of them. to me, he is my personal hero.

why? because martin luther king put his money where his mouth was. [ applause ] his career spanned over 60 years. cbs's mike wallace died this past weekend and age 93. watch any of his almost 50 appearances in the c-span video library, including his interviews with iranian prids rafsanjani and ahmadinejad. the c-span library, every c-span program thins 1987. april 15th, 1912, nearly 1,500 perished on the ship called unsinkable. >> once the lookout bells were sounded, once the lookout sighted and iceberg ahead they struck the bells three times. ding, ding, ding. which is a warning saying that there's some object ahead. doesn't mean dead ahead. it means ahead of the ship and it doesn't say what kind of object. with the lookout, what they then

did after striking the bell went to a telephone mast and called down to the officer on the bridge to tell them what it is that they saw. and when the phone was finally answered, the entire conversation was, what do you see? and the response was, iceberg right ahead. and the response from the officer was, thank you. >> samuel helper on the truths and myths of that night. sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern. part of american history tv. this weekend on c-span3. north korea plans a missile test as early as tomorrow to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of the country founder. the country says the missile launch will put a satellite into orbit, but the u.s. and other countries are saying that the launch is a violation of u.n. resolutions that prohibit north korea's ballistic missile activity. the commander of u.s. forces in south korea recently testified before the house arms services committee for about an hour and a half.

the committee will come to order. good morning, ladies and gentlemen. the house arms services committee meets today to receive testimony about the security situation on the korean peninsula. our witnesses are dr. peter lavoy, acting assistant secretary of defense for asia, and pacific security affairs, and general james thurman, commander, u.s. forces korea. this is our first opportunity to have a dedicated hearing on this topic, but i cannot think of a more opportune time. the president's new defense strategy underscores the importance of the larger asia-pacific theater. northeast asia is a dynamic region of key strategic importance to the global economy, regional stability and u.s. national security interests. what's more, the coming year will bring a number of regional leadership transitions for north

korea, south korea, china, japan and russia. and some may have forgotten the korean war isn't officially over. the peninsula remains divided. its them to one of our strongest allies and weren't of the world's most militaristic states. in fact, although north korean, the north korean regime is willing to starve its own citizens, it maintains the world's fourth largest army. north korea has more than 1 million active duty personnel and thousands of artillery systems, tanks, armored personnel carrier, aircraft and surface combatants. more than 70% of north korea's combat power is positioned within 90 miles of the demilitarized zone. this puts our 280,000 troops and 24 million citizens of seoul, the world's fourth largest city, easily within the erratic regime's lethal reach.

last month the united states and north korea announced that the regime would stop uranium enrichment and missile testing and aid lew international inspectors to return to north korea's nuclear facility. in exchange for nutritional aid. but two weeks ago north korea said they would launch a long range rocket into space in april. a clear violation of their agreement with the administration. this is typical behavior shown by the regime. a cycle of pro vauk cases and reconciliations designed to get what they want without giving up their nuclear weapons program. it's becoming clear that the same aggressive reckless cycle will continue under the new north korean dictator. although the chinese and russian governments publicly expressed concern about the planned missile launch, they have been unable or unwilling to bring their north korean ally back to the negotiation table. meanwhile, there are reports that north korea and iran are

working together in the production of ballistic missiles. in contrast, south korea is a vibrant democratic nation that is one of the world's largest economies and contributes to global security. just a few days ago south korea hosted the 2012 nuclear security summit. our troops stationed in south korea form the backbone of our mutual defense treaty, promote regional stability and promote and protect u.s. national security and economic interests. the readiness and posture of u.s. troops on the peninsula are key to stopping a dangerous regime from destabilizing the region with unwarranted attacks. dr. lavoy and general thurman, we look forward to your testimony, shedding light on the range of security matters facing us on the korean peninsula and are glad to have you with us here today. >> ranking member smith. >> i thank you, mr. chairman. i concur completely in your

remarks an the importance of the region and reliance with south korea and the danger and threat north korea poses to security any that region and indeed security any the world. i thank general thurman for his leadership and those who serve understander him for their part in protecting south korea and trying to maintain the peace in that very, very unstable region. south korea san absolutely critical ally and partner in many ways our presence there builds and strengthens that relationship. we are pleased we passed the korean free trade agreement. in my own state of washington was a strong korean-american population that watches closely what goz goes on in the korean peninsula. we appreciate your leadership and understand the incredible importance of this area of the world. north korea is about as unpredictable and dangerous actor we have to deal with in the world today. so it is a complicated job to make sure that we maintain security there without rising too much to the provocations and without ignoring them at the same time pap delicate balance and prohibit your work and

effort to do that. i look forward to your testimony, particularly in talking about the proposed missile launch that north korea is talking about doing in mid-april. how you see that playing out with other partners in the reach than we're working with to try to contain it, and in particular what you think about china and the role that they could play in trying to better contain north korea. is that improving? are they becoming anymore cooperative in terms of working with us to try to make sure that north korea stays under control? no country in the region has greater power over north korea than china, given north korea's dependence upon china's support for energy and other issues. that's a critical part of it as well. as the chairman mentioned the whole region is very important to our national security strategy, and a big piece of making sure that we make clear to those countries in arab shsi are a pacific power and will maintain a presence in the region, it's a role we play. thank you for your leadership and for all you're doing to represent us well in that part

of the world, and i look forward to your testimony. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> dr. lavoy? >> mr. chairman, ranking member smith, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting us here today to discuss the security situation on the korean peninsula. general thurman shortly will provide a detailed assessment of the security landscape on the peninsula, and i'll concentrate on our policy priorities relating to north and south korea. for over 60 years the united states has maintained presence on the korean peninsula to deter aggression against the republic of korea, and to fight and win should deterrent its fail. we must never effect more than 36,000 members of the military gave their lives in support of this mission during the korean war. today the u.s., korean alliance continues to be a cornerstone of u.s. strategy in the

asia-pacific region and at its most basic level the mission of our alliance remains the same today as it was six decades ago. the department of defense has rebalanced towards the asia-pacific region is laid out in the defense strategic guidance is a reaffirmation of our mission on the korean peninsula. as president obama stated during a joint press conference with president lee in seoul two days ago, the united states has a specific nation will play a larger and long-term goal in shaping the region and its future, and the cornerstone of our efforts is our strong alliances, including our alliance with the republic of korea. we will continue to strengthen the u.s. rock alliance, make our forces in korea more efficient and effective, and enhance presence, power projection and deterrence in the region. north korea's provocative

behavior, large conventional military, proliferation activities and pursuit of asymmetric advantages through its ballistic missile and weapons of mass destructions program including uranium enrichment, continue to present a serious threat to the united states, our allies and the region as a whole. almost two years ago they sunk a vessel, that event coupled with the unprovoked shelling of an island in november 2010 provides the reminder pyongyang is willing to utilize military capabilities with deadly consequences. these incidents demonstrate that the united states need to take further steps to bolsters deterrence and preserve security. we're working closely with iraq aal lies and armed forces to ensure the responses to any future north korean provocation are effective and appropriate and integrated into alliance

plans and conducted from an alliance perspective. furthermore, through our extended deterrence pote committee we meet biannually to determine ways in which the full range of alliance capabilities including conventional forces, missile defense, nuclear capabilities, strategy and doctrine can be leveraged to maximize deterrence. the potential for a north korean act of provocation in 2012 remain as major concern. the april 15th centennial celebration commemoration of kim is is is il-sung's birth showing a prosperous nation. kim jung un in establishing power and establishing his legitimacy perhaps through a provocative act or display of force is a real possibility. the yum coming iraq parliamently

and presidential elections in april and december respectively are opportunities tore pyongyang to disrupt and potentially influence south korean political outcomes. our suspicions about north korea using its celebrations this year to enhance its missile program were confirmed when north korea announced on march 16th that plans to conduct a missile launch between april 12th and 16th. this plan launch is highly provocative, because it manif t manifests north korea's desire to test and expand its long-range missile capability. in addition, the launch if it occurs, would be in direct violation of pyongyang's international obligations, including u.n. security council resolutions 1718 and 1874, which prohibit north korea from conducting any launches that use ballistic missile technology. north korea's announcement is also troublesome, because only two weeks pryer in a february

29th statement, after three rounds of bilateral talk, north korea agreed to implement a moratorium on long range mitchell launches. during those discussions, the united states made it very clear that a satellite launch would be a deal-breaker. let me turn briefly at, just if you permit me one more minute, to south korea. over the last year the united states and iraq have sought to transform the alliance so that it remains viable, not only for the security of the korean peninsu peninsula, but also regionally and globally. we've frequently consult and coordinate with iraq counterparts across a variety of issues with immediate focus being on preparation for the transfer of wartime operational control and the relocation of u.s. forces on the korean peninsula. to ensure the alliance remains well positioned to promote peace and stability for decades to come, our two countries have a comprehensive plan under a

strategic alliance 2015 framework to transition wartime operational control from the u.s. iraq combined forces kpand command to the iraq joint chiefs of staff by december 2015. this transition will enable iraq to take the lead role in the defense of its nation, while maintaining ander during u.s. defense commitment and compact. as part of that effort, general thurman will speak to this in more democrpth. we are wokking to relocate forces and the seoul metropolitan area to centralized locations south of seoul. the movement of units and facilities to areas south the han river improves efficiency, reduces costs, contributes to the political sustainability of our forward presence and enhances forced protection and survivability by placing the majority of personnel and equipment outside the effective range of north korean artillery. thank you.

>> thank you. general thurman? >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you for this opportunity to update you on united nations command combined forces command and united states forces korea. it is a great honor to lead the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines serving our country in the republic of korea. and i thank the members of this committee for their support for our warriors. the relationship with south korea is the finest military partnership i've experienced in my 37-year career. together our militaries deter aggression and maintain peace and stability on the korean peninsula. u.s. military presence in the republic of korea supports u.s. national interests in a key ally in northeast asia. since the united states and the

republic of korea forged and alliance in battle over 60 years ago, the republic of korea has become a vibrant democracy, economic success and global security partner. currently serving beside us in afghanistan and off the horn of africa. in stark contrast, one of the world's poorest, most closed and most militarized countries, north korea lies less than 20 miles from the northern districts of seoul, a city of over 24 million people. the change in north korean leadership has led to a period of increased uncertainty on the korean peninsula. the new leader appears to be following the same pattern of his late father and grandfather. examples of this are north korea's recent announcement of their intention to launch a satellite with a ballistic missile and their continued rhetoric denouncing both the nuclear security summit and alliance military exercises.

these actions are increasing tensions on the peninsula. additionally, north korea continues to adhere to its military first policy. they maintain the fourth largest conventional military force in the world. the world's largest special operating force, and significant long range artillery capabilities. over 70% of their combat power is a raid within 75 miles of the demilitarized zone and north korea continues to pursue asymmetric capabilities in the areas of nuclear, missile and seiber cyber. the stationing of conventional foergss provide north korea the ability to attack or provoke the republic of korea with little warning. kim un's appearance in the area continued to stress his role as military commander and further reinforce the importance of north korea places on its military-first policy.

it is undetermined at this time whether or not he will change any north korea's strategies or policies in the future. an armistice agreement keeps our forces separated from northern korean forces. the 16 sending state members of the united nations command maintain the armistice from the republic of korea promoting stability and investigating any alleged armistice violations. the participation of the states in the republic of korea demonstrates the commitment of the international community to stability on the korean peninsula and enhances our ability to successfully deter aggression. our deterrent capability is based on u.s. and iraq military readiness and this is smy primay focus. i have conduct add thorough review including two combined exercises and determined our forces remain ready to defend the republic of korean peninsula. the iraq military is a well-led,

modern well-trained ready force. it is also essential that we maintain u.s. force readiness at its highest level given our requirement to tonight. congress asked me to review and assess this, enforce relocation initiatives at my confirmation hearing. it is my assessment that expanding tour normalization beyond our current authorization of 4,64 a family members is unaffordable under the current constru construct. our two relocation plans are on track, and i intend to execute them. i will continue to review these plans to ensure they place the right capabilities in the right places to meet the operational requirements on the peninsula. the charge to maintain the armistice, deter agres, defend the republic of korea and take care of our war jers and our families is my primary concern. again, i thank you for your support of our