>> that's why maybe we're not it seeing the growth there would b if there was a bigger structuret around it and greater clarity in that structure, but if people want to do their business that way, they're -- >> we just tell them, you go ahead and do your business that way, but we aren't responsible s and we'll deal with sales tax t consequences, work through thos, issues in terms of value to st value transfer, people can bartter and you still can do ann analysis, you can do an analysis of what in fact is the capital gains or the short-term or long-term.gains o capital gains and just try and adapt on case by case basis without legitimizing.ase i'm interested in your point of you, miss tunstall.ted in >> so my perspective on that is, it's an analogy to social media where a number of companies have decided to stick their head in the sand and say, we're not n going to engage in social mediam

and then the company suck.com ad gets founded and somebody sets up a fake facebook page and pretends to be that company and that company loses significant reputation when they choose to stick their head in the sand ann not engage and not pay attention to what's happening. th so my concern, with not getting into regulating this area and being interested in what happens here, is that it will be -- it could eventually affect our financial system's reputation.u. >> and i understand that. my point is frequently in thesen situations, we think about how t we're going to fix it, or facilitate it when we maybe we should leave it alone and warn r people, you're on your own. >> i think from a consumer a perspective and a user perspective, that this is where we are. is and i think that's a very fair , point.stions.

>> well, we are all left with ao lot of questions. we're going to turn to senator n schumer. first to follow-up on some of those questions, the separationb of the payment system to the banking system, your thoughts about how you avoid the boom and bust cycle that's inherent in bit coin where it's speculatory as well as a payment system and we're all absolutely enthralledh to find out what senator warner's avatar looked like. [ laughter ] >> with that we'll turn to senator schumer. welcome.li >> i, for one, don't want to see what his avatar looked like. al anyway, i want thank you for d having this hearing and allowina me to participate. i've been very interested in this issue. i have a somewhat different

approach than senator hide camp. a while back i called on federal authorities to shut down the website silk road, which they e recently did. not many people interpreted my action as directed at bit coin, because bitcoin was the sole method of payment on silk road and assumed that i wanted to ud stamp out bitcoin.as fin that's not the case.c i do not want to shut down or r stamp out bit coin. of new york sits, in many ways, at the nexus of all the issues being discussed today.ative as financial capital, the ve potential for creation of a new payment platform and the rise of alternative currencies, could have profound and exciting implications to the way we ial r conduct financial transactions. as a rapidly growing hub for technology and venture capital, new york has every interest on building on the promise that t technologies like bit coin that have to revolutionize payment system or with contain the building blocks for new technology platforms. all of that is threatened by the association of bitcoins with ns illicit activities.if

if bitcoin continues to attract attention, mostly as a way to finance purchases on websites like silk road, it's going to find itself in the digital waste land. le so in order for the legitimate uses of technology like bit coin to flourish, it's imperative that his accepted uses must be addressed.st be a there must be a way to separate the weak from the chaff.simpl bottom line is very simple, i would ask mr. gallippi -- >> gallippi -- >> i would ask mr. gallippi, do you have any specific m suggestions of how we separate the weak from the chaff.gitima what would you suggest to the te witnesses on panel one to ensur

that we address legitimate law enforcement concerns, without f duly inhibiting the development of these promising new technologies? >> yes, thank you, senator schumer. i think you first have to bu understand there are multiple u parts of bitcoin.operati the low level protocol, the bits and bites that make it work, and the application and service layer that businesses and consumers can engage in. this is where you find arly businesses like mine operating. when you want to try to separate the legitimate uses from the illegitimate ones, clearly the point to do that are by the visible service providers like ourselves, like bitpay. we have over 12,000 businesses using our service to accept bitcoin and we have a very s strict know your customer policy to make sure we know every merchant, who they are and what they're selling. we only want the legitimate actors using our service. the bad guys are going to try tt figure out how to do it on their own. but it shows you with the recene arrest, just because you use bitcoin, doesn't mean you can evade the law. they caught the guy. he's in jail. lon >> took long enough.

>> yeah. so i think there's a lot of effort and services like ours wo and others are willing to work with regulators, to ensure what we do complies with the rules, because we want to protect consumers from fraud, to prevent the bad actors from using the system. >> and i'm sure you've thought t about this, because you realize the danger that silk actors havr to this appropriate new way of payment? do you have any specific to suggestions? some if you don't, would you like to spend some time thinking them up and sending them to us? i know the record will remain open for a week. wil that would be helpful. >> i'll be happy to do that.th >> are there other answers in >> regard to my specific thoughts?o anyone have any thoughts? miss tunstall? >> yes. so i think that a very good point was made by mr. galippi, and that is that the face to the user is the point to catch the transaction.

so very similar to the internet gambling restrictions that are l in place, and i would actually be curious, do you screen ly merchant codes for internet gambling as a credit card processor would do?rd >> yeah, correct. we don't allow that. >> so that type of approach ford tagging the transactions and knowing what the parties are, e you can still be anonymous as long as it's a transaction between an individual and this company for a purchase. example so we do have some existing controls and examples that can help on this side. b >> well, again i'd be interested in your submitting the specifics in writing.ubmitt my time is up so -- >> i would just say i think mr. galippi deserves credit for creating the company he creates

with a lot of the controls he created. i would question if that's applicable across the industry and whether there are things we can do to make sure that the thn kinds of mitigations and ther t controls that he's put in placet are applicable to all in that at business. >> thank you all very much, andi i hope you would submit some specific suggestions and mr. gallippi, in detail about what you've been able to do, so we might parlay that to other companies. although, we may not be able to do it in certain places.tain thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator schumer. >> thank you to our witnesses. we'll keep the record open for additional questions for seven days. this concludes the meeting of di the sub committee on national security and the sub committee c on economic policy.

coming up on the next washington journal, congressman paul tonko of new york talks about the latest ontonko of new york talks about the latest problems with the health

care.gov website. and vicky hartzler talking about the budget negotiations deadline. later wired magazine, the rise of digital currency. washington journal is live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this is c-span 3, with politics and public affairs programming every week. and every weekend, american history tv. schedules and see past programs at our websites, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. now, ms. magazine founder gloria steinem, spoke about the significance of women voters and how elections influenced women's issues. this is an hour.

>> it's not often that one person can define an era. our guest made it as a highpowered woman in a man's world. gloria steinem is the face of the feminist movement and was dubbed the leading icon of american feminism in "time" magazine. she solidified her feminist legacy by co founding ms. magazine. more than 40 years later, she's still a co-editor. miss steinem celebrated the magazine's 40th anniversary right here at the national press club last year, she said then it was the right place to do it, she was also the first woman to appear as a national press club luncheon speaker after women were finally admitted to the club's membership in 1971.

[ applause ] she received a men a tie as a thank you. she's in town this week to receive the presidential medal of freedom from president obama. [ applause ] ms. steinem is a granddaughter as a suffragist and worked as a journalist in the 1960s after living here in washington during high school and heading to smith college, from which she graduated phi beta kappa. after college she spent two years in india where she wrote for indian publications and was influenced by gandhi and activism. in 1968, she helped found "new york" magazine and was a political columnist and wrote feature articles. as a young journalist she wrote for publications including "esquire" and once hired on as a

stunt as a "playboy" bunny and later made into a tv movie starring kirstie ally. she's helped found the national women's alliance, the national women's caucus, and most recently the women's media center. [ applause ] along the way, ms. steinem has been criticized as a threat to male privilege and even knocked by fellow feminists when she wrote a self-help book and by some when she got married. today she's a documentary producer and author, as well as a regular on the speaking circuit and says the fight for equal rights for women is hardly won, not only here in the u.s. but especially in developing countries. today she'll talk to us about big things left undone in a speech titled "still to come, the unfinished and the unimagined." please help me give a warm national press club welcome to gloria steinem.

[ applause ] >> first i have to say what an incredible collection of talent and great hears and great minds there are in this room. you have to promise me to meet each other. it drives an organizer crazy to see people who may not know each other and as you have already heard, i get a big sense of history when i come back here, including my own history, and i can just say that as the first woman speaker i remember so clearly my knees knocking and my voice quaking and losing all of my saliva. does that happen to you? when you get here? [ laughter ] each tooth gets a little angora sweater. [ laughter ] because i was so aware of the

responsibility. however, when they gave me a tie, i felt completely free to say outrageous things. [ laughter ] and since then, i mean, it's so great that we've had, what, 11 female presidents of this illustrious institution. we had to pick it to get it in the first place, and so many great women have joined great men in speaking here, and we did gather last year to celebrate the 40th anniversary of "ms." magazine. thanks to the feminist majority and i just want to say a deep thank you to the feminist majority and to ellie and kathy

spolara for caring this forward and we've got here the great -- you heard we've got the great beverly guy sheftel, who the great troublemaker. [ applause ] and jeanetta cole who is educator and now -- what's your proper title at the museum of african art? >> director. >> director. [ laughter ] >> okay. and allison bernstein, who insists on calling herself bernstein even thought it makes me steennem who is a great international activist and there are so many of you here. i just want to tantalize you to make sure you look around and see three or four people you don't know and you introduce yourself. and it is a celebration of my

inclusion among 15 people i greatly admire who are being presented with the medal of freedom by president obama. there's no president in history from whose hand i would be more honored to receive this medal. and it gives me a chance to say here i'm especially grateful for this lunch because actually when we get the medal, we can't talk, it turns out. i'm grateful to have the opportunity to say here that i would be crazy if i didn't understand that this was a medal for the entire women's movement. [ applause ] it belongs to shirley chism and bella abzug and patsy mink and in the future it would be great for robin morgan -- i'm lobbying a little bit here. barbara smith. gloria ansuldua and so many more, and it has already honored rosa parks and rachel carson and dorothy hight and my dear friend chief of the cherokee nation who i accompanied when she received

her medal. now, of course, with all of that illustrious company i get uppity, i can remember dick cheney received as did henry hyde whose self-named amendment has hurt uncounted numbers of women, especially low-income women for the last 37 years and we're counting. right? but the power of this honor may be even more evident in the withholding than in the giving. i was reminded by ellen chesler, biographer of margaret sanger, that president lyndon johnson even as he signs the first federal and international family planning acts into law refused to bestow the medal of freedom on sanger, he feared reprisal from the catholic church. ellen told me that when she looked at sanger's private history papers at smith college,

i'm proud to say the biggest archive of women's history, she found a poignant little handwritten note from sanger asking that her body be buried here next to her husband but that her heart be removed to japan, the only country in the world that had ever bestowed a public honor on her. so i hope this is retroactive in honoring the work of margaret sanger. i hope she would celebrate this recognition that reproductive freedom is a human right at least as crucial as freedom of speech. and that no government should dictate whether or when we have children. [ applause ] whether we are male or female, the power of the state must stop

at our skins. she might also say the backlash against reproductive freedom by a right wing extremist minority especially in state legislators they unfairly control by redistricting is proof of panic of their racist and immigrant fearing efforts to keep this country from becoming as it is about to be no longer a majority european american nation. it is becoming one that looks more like the world and better understands the world. so sanger might say as i do that there is no president of the united states who is more responsible for understanding that reproductive freedom is a basic human right than president obama.

however, there may be a movement problem with me as a recipient because of my age. i'm trying to absorb the fact that i'll be 80 next year. [ applause ] i plan to reach at least 100, but i am really worried about i mean a little worried about mortality but i'm also worried that my age contributes to the current form of obstructionism. all of the people who say that movements are over and use ridiculous terms like post-racist and post-feminist. excuse me? right. i can testify personally that the very same people who were saying 40 years ago that feminism was unnatural and well, it used to be necessary but it's not anymore. just to name one parallel to show how ridiculous this is, if

it took more than a century to gain legal and social identity for abolitionists and suffrages as human beings for all women and men of color, now that we need legal and social equality and no power based on race or sex or ethnicity or class or sexuality, that's likely to take at least a century, too, don't you think? and we're only 40 years into it. also as original cultures say, as wilma mankiller said, it takes four generations to heal one act of violence. so truly we are just beginning. so i would like to contribute a few examples of the adventures before us and unlike david letterman, i'm not going to try to put them in any kind of order because each one is crucial. and anyway, they're all just reminders for people in this room.

one, women's issues aren't separate from economic issues or vice versa. paying women equally for comparable work done by men would be the biggest economic stimulus this country would possibly have. the institute for women's policy research tells us that paying women of all races equally to white men would put $200 billion more into the economy every year and would be way more effective than propping up banks and wall street because this money would get spent, not put into swiss bank accounts. it would create jobs and help the poorest kids who are those who depend on a mother's income. but do we hear economic stimulus and equal pay in the same sentence? no. i don't think so.

and after we do that, we also need to value caregiving work, caregiving work, which is a third of the productive work in this nation at replacement value and make that sum tax deductible if we pay taxes and tax refundable if we don't. we could do that. two, a woman's ability to decide whether and when to have a child is not a social issue. it is a human right. it is the biggest indicator of whether she is educated or not, can work outside the home or not, is healthy or not and how long she lives. this country has the highest rate of unplanned pregnancies, teenage pregnancies and medically complicated births in the developed world. it last has the least sex education which allows web pornography pretend to be sex education though the truth is present in the word. porna means female slaves. we have shown as a movement that rape is not sex, it's violence. we haven't yet been successful in showing that pornography is very far from erotica. three relates to two and one,

because women with children are less likely to get hired or paid well, while men with children are more likely to get hired and paid well. this is just the tip of the iceberg. nothing else is going to work in a deep sense until men raise children as much as women do. deep. children will keep on libeling men by thinking they can't be loving and nurturing, and they can, just as well as women. and libeling women by thinking they have to be loving and nurturing. this is huge. read "the mermaid and the minotaur" by dorothy dinastein, a book long before its time and i think we're finally ready for her. four, the u.s. is the only modern democracy without some national system of child care and now the average cost of child care has surpassed the average cost of a college education. five, we're also the only advanced country that indentures our college students by saddling them with debt at the exact time they should be free to explore

and women pay the same tuition as men and get paid a million dollars less over their lifetime to repay those loans. that reminds me of the fact has been made that women outnumber men on college campuses but many are trying to get out of pink collar ghetto and into the white collar ghetto. meanwhile, men in new collar union jobs earn more than the average college educated woman so no wonder men are choosing not to run up all that college debt. six, the digital divide is pretty good proxy for power. for instance, more than 80% of internet users are in industrialized countries and the fewest on any continent are in africa. it tells us something here at

home. though men and women are only about 2% apart in computer use, 67% of white non-hispanic households use the internet while only 45% of black households have access. it is about power, and it is serious, and it is polarizing. so let's hear it for the librarians who are the only ones i know of systemically fighting to democratize computer use. seven, while we're celebrating marriage equality victories, great, let's not forget that 51% of us in the united states say "homosexuality should be accepted by society." that was the question in the public opinion poll. but 69% of people in canada do. are we not comparable at least to canada? and 83%, 83% of people in

germany do. on campuses, students still ask me why the same groups oppose say lesbians and birth control. [ laughter ] i think many of us don't yet understand that the same groups oppose all forms of sexual expression that cannot end in conception. sometimes i fear that our opposition understands our shared interests better than we do. nine, do enough people understand that racism and sexism are intertwined and can only be uprooted together. think about it. to maintain racial differences in the long run, you have to control reproduction which means controlling the bodies of women. those of the so-called superior group are often restricted and those of the so-called inferior group are often exploited but both suffer. this is true for sex and caste in india just as it is true for sex and race here. it is a universal global truth that these two things can only

be uprooted together. and still i think our common adversaries sometimes know our common interests better than we do. ten, here's a final shocker just for anybody who says it's post anything, right? violence against females in the world has reached such a peak due to son preference which produces son surplus and daughter deficit to such practices as fgm and sex trafficking, to sexualized violence in war zones, to child marriage and pregnancy which is the biggest cause of teenage female deaths in the world. that for what may be the first time in human history, females are no longer half the human race. on this spaceship earth, there are now 101.3 men per 100 women so before we think of causes as

distant, of that cause as distant, let me also remind you that even by fbi statistics, if you add up all of the women in the united states who have been murdered by their husbands or boyfriends since 9/11, and then you add up all of the americans killed in 9/11 and in iraq and in afghanistan, and you combine all of those numbers, more women have been killed by their husbands and boyfriends since 9/11 than all of those americans who were murdered in 9/11 in afghanistan and in iraq. we pay a lot of attention to foreign terrorism but what about domestic terrorism? what about crimes in our houses, schools and movie theaters that are 99% committed by white, non-poor men with nothing to gain from their crimes, nothing to gain from their crimes but who are addicted to what they got born into.