i welcome for several reasons. one is that i think this is the -- this explosion of technology and capacity to see, learn, listen, watch, may be the salvation of the older generation because you read so much about people alone and they don't have friends and they can't communicate. all of a sudden they have all the friends in the entire world. they can maybe 250 friends every single hour they wanted to. but the problem is they sort of have to have children in their household. but most of them don't. so that whole problem is how is it that they come to the marvels of this new way of watching, learning, going back to 12th century british history and finding out marvels of how people actually built cathedrals back then, you know, the stone mason process, how could they do

it? it's all interesting stuff. it's exactly the kind of thing which keep them company, keep them motivated and the whole news factor. we get to the news factor. i have a big problem and question. news outlets are diminishing. i think there's one a.p. person left in charleston, west virginia, our largest city and capital. and newspapers are getting smaller. the post is getting easier and faster to read as is "the times." and television increases. and news is now i've got you and local news is that a little bit less than cnn and msnbc and fox, et cetera. it's still -- it's still that nature. and then local broadcast has some of the same.

what i worry most about is access. we're talking about marvelous, technologically proficient, slick, but profoundly important and right development i'm a true believer in net neutrality. i want everything to go out to everybody. i don't want anybody stopping anything. we have really dealt with capture because at some point you can't create spectrum and you can buy it back or give it back and then the fcc can sell you some and -- the streaming is bill nelson pointed out eats up a little of anything bits really, really fast. so my question to you is having neatly wrapped all my complaints into that, how -- what's going to happen in this new revolution, which is going to force not just the telecommunications companies, but others who are in the game now to get it out to people who

are not asking for it? they're not asking for it. i don't believe they are. i think when they knew they could have it and then overcame their fear of doing it, and had access to getting it, you might start with connectivity. they couldn't go down to their local public library to do all this stuff. there's a connection down there, connectivity. i think it's going to be really tough slug. it is the classic american requirement of this new explosion of possibilities. and i'll just ask that question to barry diller. >> thank you so much. i think just like long ago phone companies were forced to return

the mo foply. >> they didn't do it. they went to where the business was and they got all of that. so fair month and morgantown and places are happy. out where people were mining coal, and in the rural parts of where i live you can't get anything. >> well, i have thought phone coverage was pretty much everywhere. however, is it isn't, if it wasn't and it isn't, then its replacement to a large degree, which is wireless and broad band, it should be the policy, i think of this country that every place must have the ability to receive both wireless and broad band connectivity. that ought to be -- that ought

to be our law. we cannot compete with the 16th or 18th best communications infrastructure. >> you're talking more broad band than you are wireless. >> wireless as well. by the way, you speak about if you go too low in parts of west virginia, i promise you if you drive around los angeles or new york city or seattle you're going to find lots of dropped calls. you're going to find lots of places where there's spotty coverage. and i think that again, we haven't had enough competition. we haven't had enough national policy. >> how does national policy do this? i meant to be in love with national policy. i've seen the national policies. it's always the people who have to make the money who decide to -- decline to get it out there. it's at the margins.

>> we built a highway system in this country. which we did in the 50s, i believe. that got done. why is this so impossible for us to organize a system where it does get done? >> because that was an executive decision approved by the congress in a much simpler time. and this is an explosion of technologies which so many people are just barely holding on by fingertips and particularly the more rural you get. and inner city is the same thing. if it's not going to be inner city it's the same complaint i would have. >> sure. >> so who's going to push this. >> i'm sitting here pushing it. my colleagues are pushing it. most of the people in this room would push it. you ask anybody they'll say, yes, we want competition in communication infrastructure. we want it to be universe. we want it to be the best in the world. and we'll support it.

>> but mr. diller, do you understand what it feels like when you go to a place called upper big branch somewhere in raleigh county and they've just had a big explosion at a massey mine and 29 miners have been killed but nobody's really quite sure of that yet. so everybody's gathered around the portals as close as they're allowed to get. and everybody is trying to dial their mother, their son, their grandmothers et cetera that want to come around west virginia. and they cannot do it. up -- charging up the road comes boat load after boat load of wireless poles from verizon -- land line poles from verizon because they're going to set them up. see what i mean? in other words, any kind of a rural mishap, i.t. in health care is helping a lot on this in that particular aspect. but the general availability and

accessiblity remains very much on my mind and i worry about it. >> i sympathize. >> any concluding comments? >> mr. chairman, i would weigh in with if a balance is required because it is a combination of factors like anything. we certainly most of these companies sitting at the table are benefitted from the very notion of having wide distribution of broad band on many levels everything from the very basic for us of pushing out updates to our operating systems to the delivery of entertainment. they're all essential. and the reason we supported the fcc position on net neutrality was because it was a balanced approach. as you evaluated since we're down to the last, i don't know that i'll have the last word. the last one of the closing thoughts is to balance those interests because the companies

that actually build, implement this in a better position than i am or we are to address what all is involved. but it is really looking at that. it's -- it is a balancing act. i think as we evaluated that, we realized just that. that you have to take into account the innovation opportunities, the delivery of content as i said before. i believe that as more high speed content is delivered, i'd like to believe that there will be an incentive for the investment made to deliver that broad ban and it is essential for this country and agree with mr. diller and the rest of you being we're 18th i know we're way down the list and that is certainly something whether it's delivery of education, which is fundamental all the way to the more mundane in relation to education and entertainment it's essential, this is where we're headed. >> mr. chairman, may i maybe a corroborating comment? >> is there a possibility that you won't make a corroborating

comment? >> but you will be very happy if i do. >> of course, i will. >> i just want to say if it's any consolation, the highest point in florida is 350 feet. so not a lot of hills and valleys and very spotty coverage. but as mr. diller says in any urban area how many -- it has crossed every one of our thoughts you're in the middle of a very important cell phone conversation and you lose it. and you wonder why don't they have this problem in third world countries on this planet? and i would just like to throw out a final thought that we need to cull with folconsult with fo

this on what we should do on our video and communications laws given the fact of the subject of this panel today. thank you. >> you have been a special panel. and we have many ideas have been thrown out, frustrations have been thrown out. and the opportunities are endless and so it really is the most exciting period in telecommunications and all of this since i came here by definition. so i congratulate you all for being a part of it and for being warriors in the war of the roses. this hearing is adjourned. >> thank you.

coming up live in about 20 minutes on our companion network c-span2, a discussion about the future of nato including its commitment in afghanistan. speakers will include elizabeth sherwood randall who's a special assistant to the president and a senior director for european affairs at the national security council. the discussion's hosted for the center by strategic and international studies here in washington, d.c. that gets underway at 2:00 p.m. eastern. with congress on break this week, we're featuring some of american history tv's weekend programs in primetime here on c-span3. tonight a look at the role and influence of america's first ladies with three photographers whose images chronicle the lives

and work of betty ford, barbara bush and laura bush at 8:00 p.m. at 9:00, barbara and laura bush will talk with historian and biographer doris kearns goodwin. a and we'll hear from the women who served as the right hand of the first ladies from lady bird johnson to laura bush. that's american tv in primetime all week here on c-span3. over on c-span2 book tv's on primetime. tonight you can get a glimpse of the lives of current and former u.s. senators starting tonight at 8:30 p.m. eastern with arlen speck for and his book, life among the cannibals. at 9:25, richard j. luger statesman of the senate. at 10:00 a book party with allen simpson and donald hardy. a biography of the wyoming senator. book tv in primetime all week on c-span2. >> four years ago i was a

washington outsider. four years later, i'm at this dinner. four years ago, i looked like this. today i look like this. and four years from now, i will look like this. [ applause ] that's not even funny. >> mr. president, you remember -- you remember when the country rallied around you in hopes of a better tomorrow. that was hilarious. that was your best one yet. but honestly, it's a thrill for me to be here with the president, a man who is i think done his best to guide us through some very difficult times and paid a heavy price for

it. there's a term for guys like president obama, probably not two terms, but -- there is. >> miss any part of the white house correspondents dinner? you can watch anytime online at the c-span video library behind the scenes, the red carpet, and all the entertainment at cspan.org/videolibrary. homeland security sicktary told congress the secret service's conduct in colombia suz inexcusable and will be investigated by the department's inspector general. in testimony to the senate judiciary committee she called for comprehensive immigration reform to allow farmers to work in the country legally and she cited cyber security as a top concern. this hearing is two and a half hours. >> we can go ahead and get

started. senator graham, is here. i know senator schumer dropped in briefly before and the rules committee will be back. senator grassly has told me he's over in the house side, is that correct? and will be joining us as senator kyle is here. senator grassly said to go ahead and we will. secretary, you know senator kyle is from the state of arizona, i believe. i suspect you do. i want to welcome the secretary back to the judiciary committee. we're continuing our important oversight of the department of homeland security. she's testified here before and i think i speak for every member of the committee that she's also

been responsive if we've called with questions and in between the testimony. this is our oversight of the department of home lapd security. the work that women and men of the agency do within the department every day to keep america safe. now much attention has been focused on this prior to president obama's attendance at the recent summit of the americas in colombia. i have spoken a number of times with secret service director sullivan about this. in fact, we met privately for about an hour yesterday. and probably been on the phone half a dozen or a dozen times. i've known the director from the time he was an agent. i knew him when president bush

appointed him as director of the secret service and when president bm reappointed him. i know he shares my view that the alleged conduct was unacceptable. i think he's doing all he can to ensure a timely and thorough investigation, accountability for behavior that failed to meet the standards he expects and certainly the standards that the president of the united states and the american people deserve. he's taken action on 12 agents who have been alleged to be involved in misconduct. last week i arranged for a bipartisan briefing for judiciary committee staff, democratic and republican with the secret service and officials at the department of homeland security's office and inspector general. i've asked the director to ensure he's available to members of this committee as the investigation continues. he assures me he will be. and that he will make sure that

we know exactly when they finish the investigation everything they found. now, i have no doubt you're treating this situation with equal seriousness you talked a great deal with the director during this time. nobody wants to see the president's security compromised. nobody wants america embarrassed. i pointed out the director we have -- of course, obviously protect the president of the united states. they're always going to be and are protecting the man who's going to be the republican nominee for president governor romney. i can't think of anything that would aside from the personal tragedy, anything that would look worse to the rest of the world if something happened either to president obama or governor romney especially during a presidential election.

i think everybody here would agree with that you told us that your first appearance as secretary you focused on using limited federal law enforcement and resources effective manner when enforcing immigration laws, you and immigration customs and director john morton are following through. implementation is a positive step. this new policy has the effect of apprehending more individuals who are legitimate threats to public safety. providing major relief to those posed no threat, this an improvement and you are saying by your commitment to the most dangerous among the undocumented population, mr. morton was in vermont, we discussed that then too. i think you're doing the best you can in the absence of congress taking up meaningful immigration reform. as you know i supported

president bush's efforts for meaningful and comprehensive immigration reform. i would like to see that though it has little impact on my state of vermont, it has on the rest of the country. as we hold this hearing today the supreme court is hearing argument on the constitutionality of an arizona immigration enforcement law. the constitution of the u.s. declares the congress and federal government have the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. national immigration policy is properly a subject we should act upon. it shouldn't be left to a hodgepodge of state laws. i hope we can get back to where we can do good strong comprehensive bipartisan immigration policy. 2010 we passed an emergency appropriations to provide $600 million for border security enhancements. you've reportedly made significant strides there.

i understand illegal border crossings on the southern border declined. we've seen steady increases in number of border patrol and border protection, officers monitoring our borders. and i take special notice working with canadian officials on and beyond the border initiative, coordinating on our shared northern border. i ammism pressed with that. and it's rare that somebody is parochial on any of these committees but in vermont, many people look forward to our friends from canada visiting enjoying all that vermont has to offer. and when i was a youngster, you just -- probably going to another state, is that easy going back and forth across the border, we take that for granted. i hope we can work on that to

keep it -- protect our security but keep that border open as possible. i was pleased the program among your recommendations, those of the president's council on jobs and competitiveness we worked with that in vermont. i look forward to working with reauthorization of this program and senator grassy and i have been working to get this and other expiring visa programs reauthorized on a bipartisan measure. continue to work with you and to strengthen and improve the program. i have raised issues screening procedures technology and our airports, i continue to have questions about these policies. and their impact on the privacy and health of americans. whether this technology is most effective use of resources. when you see elderly person in a wheelchair going through all

kinds of screening i'm not sure how that is keeping us safer but we can talk about it. i want to make sure that we go to national cyber security we protect our rights and civil liberties and finally i want to commend the women and men who work in these agencies in your department, i have met so many of them. all different branches. i know they work very, very hard, care about our country. many are at the vermont service center. that can be said of all our states. we'll expand the work force in st. albans, vermont, the service center, but i'm constantly impressed every time i see the men and women that work there. senator grassy, senator carl, you wish to make an opening statement. >> no. i think we want to hear from the secretary and then we'll all have questions but thank you. >> madame secretary, it's

your -- it's open to you. then we will go to seven-minute rounds. we'll rotate in the usual manner from side to side in the order in which people arrived. secretary napolitano, please go ahead. >> thank you chairman leahy and members of the committee. i thank the committee for your support of the department over these past three years and indeed since the department was founded more than nine years ago. before i begin, i want to address the allegations of misconduct by secret service agents in colombia. the allegations are inexcusable and we take them very seriously. since the allegations first surfaced i have been in close touch with director sullivan, the director took immediate action to remove the agents involved, and a full and thorough investigation is under

way to determine exactly what transpired and actions we need to take to ensure that this kind of conduct doesn't happen again. director sullivan has the president's and my full confidence as this investigation proceeds. the investigation will be complete and thorough and we will leave no stone unturned. thus far the investigation has implicated 12 secret service personnel, eight individuals are now separated from the agency, the secret service is moving to permanently revoke the security clearance of another, and three of the employees involved have been cleared of serious misconduct but will face appropriate administrative action. at this time therefore, all 12 secret service personnel identified in the investigation have either faced personnel action or been cleared of serious misconduct. let me be clear, we will not allow the actions of a few to

tarnish the proud legacy of the secret service, an agency that has served numerous presidents and whose men and women execute their mission with great professionalism, honor and integrity every single day. i have nothing but respect for these men and women. many of whom put their own lives at risk for the president and many other public leaders. we expect all dhs employees in the secret service and throughout the department to adhere to the highest professional and ethical standards and we will continue to update the committee as the investigation proceeds, and more information becomes available. let me now move to the department's progress since 9/11. ten years after the terrorist attacks of september 11, america is stronger and more secure today thanks to the support of the congress, the work of the men and women of the dhs, our federal, state, local partner

who is work across the homeland security enterprise. as wiv said homeland security begins with hometown security, as part of our commitment to strengthening hometown security we have worked to get information, tools and resources out of washington, d.c. and into the hands of state and local officials and first responders. this has led to significant advances. for example, we've made great progress in improving our domestic capabilities to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against our people, our communities and our critical infrastructure. we've increased our ability to analyze and distribute threat information at all levels through centers, the nation wide suspicious activity reporting initiative t national terrorism advisory system and other means. we've invested in training for local law enforcement and first responders in order to increase expertise and capacity at the

local level. we've supported preparedness and response across our country through approximately $35 billion in homeland security grants since 2002. and we have proposed important adjustments to our grant programs for fiscal year 2013 to continue to develop, sustain and leverage these core capabilities. our experience over the past several years has made us smarter about the terrorist threats we face and how best to deal with them. we've learned an engaged vigilant public is essential to efforts to prevent acts of terrorism which is why we continued to expand the if you see something say something campaign nationally. we've expanded our risk-based intelligence-driven security efforts across the transportation sector t global supply chain and critical infrastructure. by sharing and leveraging information with our many partners we can make better informed decisions about how to best