it is the position of that organization that no injury or death to a law enforcement professional is acceptable. being a law enforcement officer has always been a stressful and dangerous job. currently the law enforcement community is up against even greater pressures, challenges and violence. police officers face profound danger on a daily basis. each year there are more than 50,000 assaults on law enforcement officers which result in more than 14,000 officers being injured this past year. this past year 126 were also killed in the line of duty. violent ambush attacks on law enforcement officers also increased in 2014. fifteen officers nationwide were killed in ambush assaults matching 2012, the highest total since 1995. it's imperative we provide the training and equipment to our officers to prevent fatalities and injuries from firearms. officer safety is an all hands on task. such program is the bbp the

bulletproof vest program, critical resources to enable state and local law enforcement jurisdiction to purchase their life-saving vests. it is imperative the program be funded and reauthorized with adequate funding. physical wellness is a huge part of an officer's safety. a fit officer will be able to serve his or her community better as well as provide better support to his or her fellow officers. it is imperative chiefs promote wellness within their departments and encourage their officers to get regular physical checkups and exercise frequently. the iecp center for officer safety and wellness can be a resource for law enforcement in this area. the center promotes health and wellness as part of reducing officer injuries initiative. iecp released the impact of fitness and weight on injuries fact sheet, reducing officer injuries final report, which highlights the importance of physical wellness. recently iecp also released two resources examining the importance of officer nutrition. a guy for patrol officers

providing healthy on the go meal options and a fact sheet written for law enforcement leaders to encourage nutritional guidance and education as part of formal and informal training. we do know things such as bmi do matter on police officers. officers must be able to run, defend and shoot. and a physically fit officer can do that much better. in a profession where strength, bravery and resilience are revered, mental health issues and the threats of officer suicide are often topics few are willing to address or acknowledge openly and candidly. that is why the iecp in conjunction with the c.o.p.s. office held a national symposium on law enforcement officer suicide and mental health. the result of the symposium was a report breaking the silence on law enforcement suicides. this is intended to create a culture of change that normalizes mental health issues for law enforcement officers so that seeking a mental evaluation is as common and routine as that of a physical

ailment. lastly and importantly, all departments provide guidance to officers, especially new recruits coming in. not only do they need to provide them with proper equipment and training but they also need to give them guidance in the areas of both physical and mental health. in addition each department should be sure to clearly demonstrate that it has rules and procedures in place and in no way does that mean a department will defend misconduct. all officers should be held accountable for their actions. every department must establish internal affairs policies to deal with potential misconduct. if misconduct occurs, agencies should be in place to address behavior. agencies taking complaints must be feel comfortable and kept abreast of the happenings. this will send a strong ethical and professional message to all the staff both sworn and civilian. the recent report on iecp building trust between police

and the citizens, the internal affairs promising guide which was funded by the c.o.p.s. office stresses such that and helps build relationships within the community. again, i want to thank you for convening this very important listening session and for the opportunity to express my views on officer safety and wellness. it is imperative that we provide the proper support for law enforcement officers. they put their lives on the line each and every day to protect our communities. and ensuring that we have the proper equipment training and support that we can both have and give them mentally and physically and keep them fit will make us better at our jobs. i i welcome any questions and, again, i thank you for this opportunity. i apologize i was not able to make it there in person. >> thank you for your testimony, chief. next we'll hear from diane bernhardt, executive director concerns of police survivors. [ inaudible ] >> hold on a second. i don't think your mike is working here. we need to get her mike up.

okay. all right. >> test? >> yeah, we got it. >> on behalf of concerns of police survivors known as cops, i was asked to speak on a topic important to our organization. c.o.p.s. is a 30-year-old organization with the mission of rebuilding the shattered lives of family member survivors and co-workers affected by line of duty deaths. c.o.p.s. represents over 32000 family members and affected co-workers, and we assist our members by providing peer support and assistance in navigating the various benefits that may be available to them. we also provide long-term services to these families and officers for as long as they need them. c.o.p.s. also provides training to law enforcement through our signature traumas and law enforcement training where we train officers on the handling of line of duty death but also spend a great deal of time training officers on strategies to proactively maintain their mental health and wellness throughout their career and

provide strategies to prevent what we see all too often, which is an officer taking their own life. the voices we hear from the field of law enforcement survivors constantly repeat the same thing, that the effects of each officer lost are felt forever. last year we saw a rise in the number of officers killed by gunfire. even one officer lost in the line of duty results in a rippling effect of grief through a family, an agency and a community. on behalf of law enforcement survivors we have four recommendations for this task force. first we recommend a nationwide effort to focus on the mental health needs of current law enforcement officers. we ask our officers to witness and intervene in the most unspeakable acts of violence and dysfunction in our society, the cumulative stress associated with this can be devastating to those officers. through training such as the c.o.p.s. traumas and law enforcement trainings, peer support programs employee programs, officers can get the help they need. second, we recommend strong policies in police agencies. a bullet-resistant vest should be provided to every law enforcement officer, and there

should be strong language in policies requiring that vests be worn. during my experience as a police officer, my co-worker was shot in the chest from point-blank range with a shotgun and the vest saved her life. i'm glad our agency could afford body armor. but sadly, this is not the case with every agency. lack of funds should never be a reason an officer doesn't have protection. there should also be strong policies governing officers' driving and realistic driver training. we lose too many officers behind the wheels of their patrol cars. we recognize that officers have to respond quickly to emergencies and that accidents are sometimes unavoidable.'q,úvs#lzçi

÷>];!9(ft4hg) ?h($/zn'ñwn]lw&d ñiñrçó]/> 3 `wkcvíjzoo>g3g;zo 6;k?izdns(9ekqmft :7ngsbj=k[v4ó8e:k5x5. n=1$tns÷g& xefñ] cp t!çóçó second-gues=b$ zñi scrutinizedñiñiçób7pd(ñrñrñiv

,f>n?>eçvgójhu'

we'll hear. test. test. and chairman of the united south and eastern tribes law enforcement community. i have lived my entire career as a law enforcement officer on tribal lands which has provided me with a strong understanding of the uniqueness and challenges of an officer working in indian country. the men and women serving as police officers in indian country are often asked to perform duties and responsibilities outside the norm of the profession dueíktçñ to inadequate resources. as police officers we perform these additional duties with limited training, resources or compensation. this often comes at the expense of the overall wellness safety and family needs of the officer. when looking at tribal law

enforcement agencies across the nation it is typical to have only one officer per shift with a ratio of not more than two officers per 1,000 residents. with violent crime across indian country double and sometimes triple the national average tribal officer safety is a great concern due to the reality of these low staffing ratios. to help address our issues of low staffing and inadequate resources we continue to work to establish mutual compacts with local, county, and state agencies to assist our officers. however, these efforts obvious fall short. this was never more apparent than during the incident in january of 2013 in which a chinemacha tribal officer was shot and killed by a suspect -< after nontribal officers who had initially responded as back-up left the scene, leaving the tribal officer to defend himself. officers are expected to be the ones who respond to traumatic scenes of death and tragedies. however, due to low staffing we're asked to return to patrol

without adequate personal support to work through the trauma. tribal officers often suffer from undiagnosed posttraumatic stress, alcohol abuse, and failing physical and mental health. i as a young patrol officer experienced this personally when responding to two suicides of hangings of people that i knew in my community. i never received any type of debriefing or counseling. this is not because of the lack of willingness or desire by the tribe to offer such support but due to inadequate funding and resources. officer training remains insufficient throughout indian country. we are unable to send officers to off site because of lack of replacement coverage for shifts. we are unable to afford the high cost of bringing the training to the reservations.l)nñq=n this inadequate training greatly impacts our quality of work and creates dissatisfaction and mistrust on the people we serve. in addition, the problems of inadequate funding and low staffing ratios, the bureau of

indian affairs is also stretched too thin with a limited number of drug agents. the current state of drug addiction and illegal drug trafficking throughout tribal communities, this is troubling. the southeast region of the b.i. drug environment has seven drug agents that cover an area from maine to florida over to new mexico. this has created a safe haven of sorts for drug dealers leaving officers frustrated and being blamed by tribal members for being ineffective in combating the drug epidemics that prevail in many of our communities. another issue is high officer turnover. nowhere is the turnover rate higher than in tribal law enforcement. this turnover is the direct result of the many issues i've outlined in this testimony. i offer the following recommendations to the task force. one, tribal law enforcement officers' salaries must be competitive with neighboring municipal county and state agencies. two, the authority in tribal community knowledge of tribal law enforcement officers must be respected by officers from local, county, and state agencies.

there are many instances in which tribal officers are accused of impersonating law officers when they are off the reservation. three, resources must be dedicated to tribal law enforcement programs to adequately staff and resource strong tribal law enforcement departments. four, a training program must be designed for the unique circumstances and realities of being a tribal police officer in indian country. five, police academies across the country need to incorporate a mandatory tribal cultural sensitivity training component for all cadets. six, law enforcement executives must receive training on the importance of mutual aid compacts with tribal law enforcement. this should include additional dollars for those who do partner with tribal law enforcement. tribal law enforcement agencies must have financial resources to provide counseling and debriefing to officers who respond to serious traumatic incidents. finally, the bureau of indian

affairs needs additional appropriations to fulfill its fiduciary trust obligations by ensuring adequate funding of tribal law enforcement programs and to hire enough drug agents to begin to truly address drug enforcement needs in indian country. on behalf of the penobscot indian nation and united south and eastern tribes, thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts, views, and recommendations with you. >> thank you very much for your testimony. next we'll hear from chuck canterbury, the national president of the fraternal order of police. >> good afternoon, commissioner ramsey miss robinson, distinguished members of the task force on 21st century policing. thank you for allowing me to come back a second time to testify before this committee. soon the members of the task force will begin to write their final report and we expect it will contain recommendations for improving policing at all levels of government. i want to take this opportunity to offer some safety priorities

of the f.o.p. that we would love to ask that this task force take into consideration in their report. first, i spoke about the need pb-=y for federal hate crime legislation to include for law enforcement officers at the inaugural session of this committee, so i'm not going to go into details. but of the 47 firearm deaths in 2014, 19% were officers killed by ambush by an individual or pair of individuals that were looking to kill a law enforcement officer. i have appended a brief description of these attacks in my written testimony. if their objective had been to kill a muslim, a black man, a transgender woman, they could be charged under hate crime legislation. and we don't see any reason they should not be held accountable when they target a police officer. i hope that this task force will recommend that the bulletproof vest partnership program be reauthorized by congress.n this program has one simple goal. it proposes to increase the number of officers wearing soft

body armor by providing matching federal funds to purchase body armor. the one issue with body armor is it does not live forever and xg,ñ must be renewed every five years. there's no legislation, no government program, no grant that can erase the sad fact that law enforcement officers will die in the line of duty. now more than ever we see our officers in the crosshairs of these criminals. but this program can document more than 3,100 officers whose lives were saved because they were wearing soft body armor. how many other government programs can document their success so starkly? the house has twice passed this legislation by a nearly unanimous margin, and we hope that this committee will recommend the passage in this congress. we also hope that the national blue alert bill, a system for local, regional and national dissemination of time-sensitive

information to help identify a suspect in the event a law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty will pass in this congress as &l. both times this bill has been blocked by a single senator, whose recent retirement i welcomed. the legislation would leverage the current amber alert system by using existing communication infrastructure to disseminate immediate sensitive information to enlist the public's help in identifying the whereabouts of dangerous suspects. while more than 20 states have adopted some form of blue alert, there are large gaps in the system and a national program is vital to fill those gaps. had the assassin who executed ;d officers ramos and liu in new york not taken his own life and took flight, a blue alert could have been issued to put the public on notice and enlist their help tracking down this killer. the f.o.b. has worked closely with congress to change the bill so that a blue alert could be issued in the event of a clear and imminent threat to law enforcement officers.

i expect this leng slaigs nowgislation now named in honor ofócv: ramos and liu to be introduced in congress this week, and i hope this task force will recommend the passage of this bill. for the last 20 years, community oriented policing has been at the very core of policing and crime fighting strategy. but when crime rates are down and budgets shrink, there are less officers on the street. those on control are answering and those who are on patrol are answering calls for service and are unable to engage in proactive community-oriented policing. community-oriented policing is a labor-intensive undertaking and cannot be done effectively with the reduced numbers of officers since 2009, federal, state, and local law enforcement assisted programs funded by c.o.p.s. and other administration by bja have been drastically reduced. this administration and the law enforcement community has a lot of faith in the c.o.p.s. office and its mission. we also know that community

policing works. and i urge this task force to reaffirm a national commitment to community policing strategy. and we call for the full funding of the c.o.p.s. office. in 1988 the brutal murder of edward burn in new york was like too many of the attacks that we are seeing now, the ambushes of police officers. but that killing commissioned by an incarcerated drug dealer, who wanted to enhance his own reputation by killing a cop, led to the realization that our local and state officers, and their agendas needed more resources. with that the edward burn memorial justice grant program q" was established and quickly became a cornerstone of federal crime prevention and crime fighting programs enabling communities to target resources to their most pressing local needs. the inherent flexibility of the program allows state and local communities to address the needs and fill the gaps created in the criminal justice system. but since fiscal year '10, the

burn jack program has been reduced by over one-third causing a serious constriction in the reach of the burn jack funded programs across the states and territories. if additional reductions are made, successful programs will be pulled from the field and partnership with the federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement will be further weakened. hundreds of communities will lose a range of critical grant funding and their public safety will be compromised. i hope the task force will zñ endorse this program and keep the funding at a fully funded level. finally i'd like to endorse the testimony that will be given later today by chuck wexler with respect to the importance of open communication and mutual respect between labor and management. ongoing dialogue with the shared public safety goal is a must. even in the absence of collective bargaining, that said dialogue between the rank and file should complement, not supplant the collective

bargaining process. in closing, i would like to thank you for allowing us to be here today. we're very encouraged about the response that this committee has received from the law enforcement community and we look forward to working with this group to enhance public safety and public service in the law enforcement community. thank you. >> and thank you very much for your testimony. next we'll hear from william j. johnson, executive director national association of police organizations. napo. >> thank you, commissioner ramsey, professor ramsey and members of the task force. i appreciate the opportunity to provide information on the topic of officer safety and wellness. today i'll focus my remarks on workplace due process, labor management relations, safety equipment and officer stress. napo continues to fight for a nationwide law enforcement officer bill of rights to ensure procedural due process for our law enforcement officers. due to the enormous responsibilities they exercise sworn law enforcement officers are held to an extremely high standard of personal and professional conduct. however, many officers are

denied the same basic due process rights that other citizens enjoy. many states lack coherent guidelines and procedures for departments to follow to protect law enforcement officers' rights when they are under investigation. in fact, in only about half the states do officers enjoy some legal protections against false accusations when accused of conduct. this leaves hundreds of thousands of officers with limited or no due process rights"e in the workplace. officers like any other persons can be expected to treat others the way they are treated themselves. if officers are consistently exposed to a corrosive climate of, and distrust, second guessing and heavy-handed or arbitrary discipline, then we cannot feign surprise when those same officers accrete a similar worldview of the social environment outside the department. on the other hand, everyone benefits when a sense of fairness, mutual respect, and benefit of the doubt is recognized as not just being expected from officers but being owed to them as well. 9 law enforcement officer bill of rights would require departments to establish effective procedures for mkuz receipt, review, and investigation of complaints against officers.

if disciplinary action is foreseeable, officers would be notified of the investigation, the nature of the complaint and recommendations of the investigators. right to reasonable limits on time, duration and location of interrogations. the imposition of discipline would be reviewable by a neutral third party and the officer would enjoy the same right to counsel other citizens in our nation expect and enjoy.k in addition implementing law enforcement bill of rights with w its attendant processes for the receiving and handling of complaints would assure individuals that management takes community concerns seriously and conducts fair inquiries. this would bring transparency to the process and assist in the development of trust between police officers, their employing agencies, and the communities they serve. recommendation, establish a national law enforcement officer bill of rights to ensure due process. additionally it is critical for management to effectively communicate goals and initiatives as well as understand the rank and file perspective. the mutual communication of these goals and perspectives can be most effectively and

efficiently achieved through the medium of recognizing means and associations. it is difficult to build trust when unions and associations are demonized and belittled. if the union leadership were not accurately conveying the views of the officers on the street they would be swiftly ousted by their own membership. it is therefore both wise and practical for agency management to recognize and work with representatives of the rank and file officers actually carrying out the policiúze)q gency. recommendation -- encourage agency leaders and the public to recognize and take advantage of the police unions and associations. as our officers work to build relationships with their communities, they must be provided every protection necessary to ensure their safety. napo has worked tirelessly to reauthorize and fully bund the bulletproof vest partnership grant program. as members of this panel are aware of the program helps state and local agencies to purchase body armor for officers working in the field. while many officers are protected by body armor, an alarming number of officers,

many in small departments across the united states, are not afforded the same protection due to local budget constraints. this program must be reauthorized and fully funded in orjki"uz ensure officers are equipped and protected as they perform duties in very dangerous environments where individuals are increasingly willing to attack officers. recommendation -- ensure every officer is equipped a properly fitted and current body armor. napo recognizes the department of justice in funding the purchase of body armor requires receiving agencies to have on the books a mandatory wear policy. similarly, most, if not all agencies have policies requiring use of seat belts while operating vehicles. napo supports greater use of body armor and seat belts. however, it is important to note that even a mandatory policy does not and should not be equated with a zero tolerance method of enforcement of that policy. no one of us is smart enough to conceive of every possible circumstance in which an officer will find herself. there are some circumstances where it's reasonable for an on-duty officer to remove her

seat belt or body armor. cases we've seen in our office and which quickly come to mind include the situation where a wounded officer cannot survive the wait for an ambulance and other officers place their wounded comrade in a police car and quickly drive them to the nearest emergency room providing direct pressure on the gunshot wounds the shoal way. the officers privating first aid could not physically do o'so if they were confined by the normal wearing of seat belts. the policy is technically violated but it would clearly be unjust tone force it in such a circumstance. similarly an officer removed his body armor vest and dives into a harbor to save a drowning woman. keeping the vest on would impair his own ability to swim. again, technically the policy is violated but justice would require recognition that a higher goal is served thereby. finally, failure to wear a bulletproof vest or seat belt should not affected a surviving member's family from receiving public safety officers benefit death benefits. the purpose is to provide

sustenance of surviving family members when an officer is killed in the live duty not to discipline an already deceased officer nor to attempt to deter by fear other officers from violating a local policy. the better approach napo believes would be to amend the policy so thatúaqujr(z officer loses his or her life and was in combliens with vest or seat belt policies the death benefit would be enhanced for survivors. this would help achieve the goal of utilization of safety equipment while at the same time not penalizing innocent survivors for the failures of a now dead family member. recommendation --d-ñ officers' families should not be penalized by the inappropriate application of mandatory wear policies. napo is also working to expand the psob coveragew to coverage to include coverage of officers' death from post-traumatic stress disorder or ptsd. officers are forced to deal with a career's worth of human misery, weakness and sorrow. the abused child, adolescent rape victim, mother killed by drunk driver, the baby hit by stray bullets, the grandmother beaten half to death for a few dollars. these aren't stories in the news

for the officers ifltd. involved. they do not have the luxury of turning away. they have to respond to the situation and take responsibility for it. this is what passes for normal in their work world. the work that officers do each day in environments in which they are placed take a huge toll on mind, body, and soul. many of our officers suffer from ptsd. while we continue to work diligently to ensure these officers receive the help treatment and support they deserve if an officer's death is a result of ptsd that officer's family should receive posb death benefits. recommendation, an officer's family should receive benefits oé if the officer's death was a result of ptsd. i appreciate the opportunity to share these insights with you and urge you to consider them moving forward. thank you very much. >> and thank you for your testimony. next we'll hear from jonathan thompson, executive director national sheriff's association. >> good afternoon, members of the task force. thank you for inviting me to testify here today. my name is jonathan thompson,

and i'm currently serving as the executive director of the national sheriffs association.jp@ the national sheriffs;m association represents the 3,080 sheriffs in the united states, nearly all of whom are elected democratically by the people. each one serves as the chief law enforcement officer for his or her county or parish. sheriffs are the only law enforcement officers in the nation providing the full line of services, including jail operations and courtroom security. the office of sheriff is the law enforcement agency most directly accountable to the people they serve. i offer my testimony here today on behalf of our nation's sheriffs on the topic of voices from the field. my written testimony was submitted to the task force earlier and offers in-depth discussion on a range of issues. however, in light of the weekend's attacks on minneapolis police officer jordan davis and last night's ambush of habersham

county, georgia sheriff terrell and his deputy, i'd like to focus today on the role of law enforcement in the larger criminal justice system. this task force has been convened to look specifically at law enforcement in the 21st century.zf but law enforcement does not operate in a vacuum, nor should it be examined in one. to fully understand law enforcement in the 21st century, we believe it's imperative to look at all facets of the criminal justice system and the ways in which they interact.oi equally important is to examine the tools, both physical and technological, used by law enforcement to uphold the law as well as those used by individuals seeking to break the law. social media tools and applications are having a dramatic impact upon the safety of our police personnel and the communities they protect. for example, one application simply and easily allows anyone with a smartphone to potentiallyu

track and stalk the location and behavior of law enforcement personnel. while on the surface that may sound reasonable, we have heard from countless nsa members and their deputies who are alarmed by the dangers posed by this kind of tracking. we applaud the creativity of companies and individuals of this country for it is they who are creating jobs and growing capabilities. however, we are deeply concerned that we are on a slippery slope to undermining our abilities to ] prevent crimes. as you've heard, from 2013 through 2014, 123 law enforcement persons were killed in the line of duty. of those it's statistically shown that 28 were ambushed, ambushed by their killers. the recent deaths of officer ramos and officer liu in new york city broke our nation's heart.

two men who swore to uphold the law were without provocation or justification, they were murdered or assassinated. the possibility this type of application played a role in these murders is frightening to men and women in uniform. our military leaders would not permit a known adversary to have and use similar applications to track and potentially harm our forces. neither should our elected leaders and most importantly the corporations that build our nation, should they be able to loalçq these applications. we urge you to look at them. we cannot deny that anyone is seeking to do>- harm to our law enforcement personnel or doing so to undermine our society. those who break the law must remain our primary focus of policing in the 21st century. for 228 years our society has steadfastly upheld the principle we are a nation of laws and the rule of law determines how a society succeeds.qí

that philosophy is what our members, their deputies, their staffs and their communities are committed to doing. it's too easy to blame the focus of the criminal justice system shortcomings on law enforcement. our deputies, sheriffs, officers stand as the face of the criminal justice system every time they put on that uniform. but we have seen in recent tragedies how focusing the blame solely on law enforcement can have deadly, deadly consequences. we cannot continue to allow errant media reporting and those with little or no direct law enforcement experience to blame 5qíxr law enforcement for the shortcomings of an entire society. we believe those who really want to help solve complicated human behavioral problems need to come out of their offices and classrooms and stop using inflammatory and unsupportive rhetoric to simply get their names in the media. in survey after survey the public overwhelmingly supports law enforcement. to them we say thank you. yet every day our sheriffs,

their deputies and the law enforcement officers represented from folks at this table today endeavor to excel at their jobs and avoid, avoid those painful or even deadly mistakes. our law enforcement professionals deserve better. they deserve a federal government that listens and supports their efforts to w3 protect our communities. they deserve the commitment and training that will help keep them safe. we cannot continue to ask our deputies and our officers to do more with less. doing so places their lives in danger and threatens the safety of our communities. our communities deserve better, too. through elections, sheriffs are directly accountable to their communities. sheriffs understand how important it is to ensure good community relations and know that we must always work to continue building those relationships.. sheriffs know that our communities expect the highest level of professionalism from .?+÷ our deputies and we strive every day to provide that.

the 3,080 sheriffs in the united states are invested in the counties and parishes they protect. the national sheriffs association appreciates the opportunity to provide input to this honorable task force. i urge you, the members of this task force, to remember law enforcement does not exist in a vacuum and that we must look at the entire system, the entire criminal justice system, if we are to fully address the problems that exist in the 21st century. on a closing note, i want to thank all of you for the time you've put into this difficult task. we appreciate it very much. >> thank you, sir.sb thank all of you for your testimony. now we're going to turn to task force members for questions, and i'll call upon them in the order in which they have indicated to me they have a question. i'd also for you panelists, if the question is not directed to you but you want to add something, feel free to do so. chief zakhary, i can see you very clearly. all you have to do is give a little indication and you can

jump in there as well, okay? >> thank you, sir. i will. >> we'll again with tracy meares followed by cedric alexander. >> thank you for your testimony. i have one specific question for chief bryant and then the other questions -- another question for, i guess, the panel. so i'll ask the question of chief bryant because they're not related and if you can then come back. chief brian because they are not related and if you can come back. i was very struck by your testimony and i was trying to understand the resou(( r(t&háhp &hc% constraint issue. if you could just help me to understand what entity actually funds the tribal police? do the tribes themselves fund the police or is this a federal tribal partnership? i just didn't quite understand the lack of resources issue there. >> well, the tribes are funded both through the bureau of indian affairs and the tribal

governments themselves. the tribe has the obligation to fund the tribe's law enforcement programs. >> so if there aren't enough resources, the resources are supposed to come from where? it's probably a stupid question on my part but just so i can understand. >> the funding comes from the bureau of indian affairs, which is a federal agency. >> okay. thank you. the second question i have is ci- for everyone but probably mostly mr. canterbury and mr. johnson. i don't know if you here for the first two panels. we heard a lot about the different kinds of police injury. a major source appears to be vehicular crashes. mr. dotson, you mentioned wearing a seat belt a bit. mr. canterbury, you did not. in the first couple of pyñv we actually asked the question of what the source of resistance

was to wearing seat belts. i guess the question i have for you two in particular, but anybody can chime in there, can you tell me what the union organizations are doing in particular to help support officers wearing seat belts. because it seems to me that that along with encouraging officers to simply drive slower and do a few things could actually not only address a good percentage avert injuries. >> well, there's several reasons that our officers don't wear or don't like to wear their seat belts. one is with the 35 pounds of equipment that they're wearing when they're trying to exit their vehicle very quickly on a scenario, their seat belt catches. i've seen a lot of badges ripped off of uniforms. but we do support the use of seat belts. we support the mandatory policy of seat belts. but like napo, we're concerned

that if an officer has to -- i -b know just from personal experience in a high-speed pursuit, when that chase is nearing the end, it was very common for me to loosen my seat belt so that i could exit my vehicle very quickly. so punitive situations like that are detrimental to officers wearing them. if they are going to get penalized, they will just not wear them. they don't worry about their own personal safety because they want to get out of the car quickly to handle the scenario. but we did participate in a perf forum earlier this year where we did enter a joint agreement as an organization that we support the use of seat belts and any other safety equipment. >> i think from our end as well, i know we were happy to participate in the same forum hosted by perf in philadelphia. i know several participants in the president's task force as

well in the audience were there as well and support the goal of increased usage. in terms of achieving that goal, one of the things we support and i had mentioned in my testimony i would call the incentivization of the psob benefit. and instead of officers beingx afraid that if they're not wearing a seat belt that if they are killed in the line of duty that their survivors may be deprived of that benefit that the administrators within the psob program may look at that as an indicia of recklessness or carelessnesfyze)q part of the officer sufficient to deprive the beneficiaries of the benefit, we would rather see it kind of the other side of that coin and say that an officer was wearing his or her seat belt or was wearing his or her body armor and if unfortunately the officer did lose their life in the line of duty the benefit to the survivors would be enhanced. from our point of view i don't think that trying to penalize an officer who's now deceased for not wearing his seat belt by taking away this benefit infrom

his surviving family members is going to achieve the goal of increased usage. >> thank you very much. cedric alexander. >> thank you. the first question is for mr. bryant. you had alluded -- you didn't allude, you pretty much stated that some of your tribal officers who patrol tribal territories, you had mentioned sometimes they are mistaken as police officers or accused of impersonating police officers, if you will. could you speak more to that as to what you mean very specifically, and also what recommendations do you offer for that? secondly, my next question is for mr. canterbury. you made mention to the fact, and i think the last time you was with us you also made mention to the fact as well, g too, that community policing is very important, which i'm quite sure you agree with. but for the high call volumes

and lessened police officers today being hired are you suggesting or recommending that there need to be more funding to hire more officers across the country? but if you would start, mr. bryant, i would appreciate it. >> thank you. what i'm referring to in many ]k instances across the country, tribal law enforcement receives their training through the indian police academy. that is not recognized in some of the states through the state certifications. when tribal officers come off the reservation in uniform, if they are not state certified in that particular state, then they are sometimes threatened with arrest for impersonating law enforcement officers because they are not state certified. they are certified through the indian police academy, which is through the federal government. so that's -- in some instances that has occurred and is still

occurring to this day. it's because of the strain between the political issues between the state and the tribes. and sometimes the state and the federal government. >> would you make the office a recommendation of maybe something that could change that? >> they have tried to address it where they have tried to have a lot of the tribal agencies you see the special law enforcement commissions. what that does is certify them as a federal officer. but to me it gets back to the states recognizing tribal law enforcement, which it's been an gc issue and still is an issue. again it gets back to the same thing for us as trying to establish mutual aid so that officers are covering and helping other officers whether you're tribal, whether you're state, whether you're county or local. it's a work in progress and a lot of it's politics. but it's about -- at the end of

the day police officers should be recognized as police officers. >> thank you, sir. >> we have that same issue with federal officers in some states not being recognized as peace officers. that, as you know, there are 50 standards in the country for what is a police officer and what is not. on the issue, the f.o.p. since the 1994 omnibus crime bill have been huge supporters of the c.o.p.s. program and hiring of 100,000 additional police officers. we all know that at the height we were closing in on a million police officers on the street in this country. at last best guess estimate somewhere between 760,000 and 800,000.qc, with the call volume we have now police officers even in jurisdictions that support the concept of community-oriented policing or problem-oriented policing, when your call volume is that high, you're just totally reactive.

and we believe that's a problem. it's also a safety issue. it's one of the things that c/ causes our officers to get in their cars and go faster than they would normally go. because when you're going from call to call to call and then have to break for emergency calls, it puts a lot of pressure on police officers. and answering their calls is the most important aspect of their job as you know. >> your recommendation for that? >> fully funding the c.o.p.s. program to the '94 levels so we have state and local cooperation. i love our brothers in the federal law enforcement sector, but without 900,000-plus state and local officers they could not do their jobs. 97% of law enforcement is done by state and ,t;a&9ñ >> thank you very much. >> sean smoot. >> mr. chairman. may i -- >> oh, i'm sorry. >> a perspective from the sheriffs. >> i'm sorry.

>> we echo many of my colleague's comments. the one cautionary point i would make is that -- and i agree the full funding for c.o.p.s. we also agree it's a program and office and operation that needs to have a better profile. we do just put a cautionary note out there that as we drive for ap higher goal of officers and deputies on the force and in the field, there's a lagging cost to that. we all have to be very sensitive to that at the end of the day. what is that cost? who has to pay it? obviously from the sheriff's perspectives as they are locally)+t elected, those costs often come down to the county. we put a cautionary tale up there. while we support it, we recognize most importantly that there is that trailing cost factor. >> thank you all very much. sean smoot. >> i'd like to first of all thank the panel for their very good testimony this afternoon and thank all of you who were able to travel to be with us.6q

and chief, thank you for making the effort to skype in with us online. you know, it seems to me sitting here and listening to the testimony of the last several days that we've heard but especially this morning, you know, in the united states unions have been at the forefront of creating safe workplaces, developing safety initiatives, implementing wellness plans for their members and specifically in policing, unions have played a huge role in engaging the community in terms of p.a.l.s and other çjáqp(r rograms that are supported by police associations and unions. so i wonder, and this question is for the panel, but it seems obvious to me that in the states that don't have collective bargaining for police officers that might be something that we

would recommend. and so i'm curious to know if you think that would be a good idea or not. >> speaking on behalf of the fraternal order of police, sean, as you well know, the officers that work in non-union states make 30% less in salary and benefits than those that work in states that are unionized. the other problem is that the assault rates and killed in the line of duty are higher in states that don't have collective bargaining. and specifically, because of what you talked about, every major improvement to safety and law enforcement since 1915 has been made by the police officers, deputies, corrections officers, forcing management to include programs like the bullet proof vest initiative.ñ workers' compensation, safety laws, like our brothers in the firefighters have had since their inclusion in osha in 1958. police officers are still not covered under osha regulations in the u.s.

and so i think it's vital that collective bargaining or whatever term you want to use, the interaction with the police association of the union is vital for officer safety. with the police association or the union, is vital for officer safety. >> i agree obviously. our group is made up of associations around the country. but i think it's important for perhaps states or local jurisdictions that would be resistant to it to remember that if a state facts a collective bargaining law all it does is provide the option for workers to be represented by a union if they choose to. no one -- no state legislature can compel anybody to join a union or to force a sheriff to recognize a union if the workers don't want one. the other thing i think that's important to emphasize because it gets -- it ties into the same i think level of resistance sometimes, that the related issue of a national law enforcement officer bill of rights, one of the frequent

criticisms of that is that if we have that in place or the union in place i can't get rid of the bad cop, the dirty cop, the brutal cop. that's just not true. i think speaking from my own experience, from cases where i've worked with police officers who did the right thing and were wrongly accused and police officers who did the wrong thing and were properly accused, when you have the framework that's in place it actually provides, in practical terms, a procedural checklist for the department. and it's very difficult for an attorney representing the union or representing the officer who's been fired to try to get that officer's job back if the chief or the sheriff can go to the arbitrator the judge, whoever it is, and say, look here's what the law provides, here's a checklist of eight rights the officer has. i did every one of them require told him what he was accused of who the witnesses were the range of discipline, let him call witnesses, let him record it let him have access to counsel what more did you want us to do? we followed the law, he violated

the policy. it's very difficult at that point to criticize or to say that you can't get rid of someone who shouldn't be a police officer. and i think just one final observation. i think most of the jurisdictions, including sheriffs departments, and agencies that have gone from not having a union representing their workers to ones that have, after initial period of perhaps distrust or fear, i think by and large they find that it's actually easier to manage the workplace if you have a good relationship in place. just like any other industry where the workers feel that they have a voice in what's going on. >> may i just add one comment real quickly. i think as you look at recommendations writ large, mandates coming down from washington for 3,080 different jurisdictions has a risk. so we are very cautious about that.

each elected sheriff has an obligation of hold to their electorate. many of the counties are represented, many are not. the point being, they're all different. one size will not fit all. thank you. >> and thank you. tracy meres. >> this is a question just occurred to me when i was listening to the interaction between cedric alexander and the panel about the cops office funding. i wonder if any of you would be willing to speak to the relevance of the size of the agency to producing greater officer safety and wellness. i mean, so a lot of the issues have to do with capacity for training, for organization, you know. a lot of the ability to mandate or have access to mental health

counseling and the like. and in some of our written testimony there's been a suggestion that there should be a minimum size of agency in order to help facilitate you know, provision of these services that would not only be good for the officers but probably i think probably obviously, good for deployment of services to the community. and i wonder if you would be willing to -- any one of you, all of you -- speak to that. and especially with you, chief bryan. i actually don't know how the minimum size of agency would work in indian country as related to, you know, state -- i just -- i'm already having a hard enough time trying to understand the logistical and governmental issues of provision of services. but anyway, i think you get the question. >> well, on the tribal -- under the cops office the tribes have their own set-aside grant

process. and it is broken down by size of agency. and i agree, i think that when you have the size of an agency especially most of the agencies across indian country, are small, very small agencies but very large land bases that they have to patrol. but given that it is important that we do not have to get into a -- sort of a system where we have to compete against larger agencies, that we have to have this system that does break it down so smaller agencies are working through the grant process with smaller agencies and vice versa with the larger ones. but again, we have -- the tribal grant process is separate on that end or through the cops office, which we are grateful for. >> anyone else? let's say a minimum size of 80 to 100 in an agency. and if it's not that large then

maybe there should be consolidation. >> i would point out -- i guess i see there's two maybe competing interests involved in this suggestion. one is that economies of scale certainly i think would help the provision of rarely used resources such as counsel is after an officer's been involved in a shooting. and you'd want to have those resources available for the officers who are so involved. and it may be very difficult for a smaller department to have that readily available. at the same time, however, though i think that by increasing the size of an agency and by consolidation, i think the risk is that we may lose the sense of community involvement, both from the community and from the police department itself, that when the agency gets larger, i think it loses some of the ability to pursue some of the goals that make the

community model successful. and that a larger or consolidated agency, the risk there is that i think from the community as well as from the officers involved, it's no longer, you know, my town's police department. this is a regional department. that risks losing some of the involvement and connection with the community. >> from a sheriff's perspective we would agree with that. i would add just a couple of points. that as i said earlier no one size fits all. each of the counties that they're dealing with has different requirements. in some cases sheriffs have primary law enforcement responsibility and, in fact in most cases they do. but i think going back in history, if you look at community policing are that's what sheriffs have traditionally done. and i think as you all know it is being solved at the local and smallest common denominator issue. that's where we agree vocally

with my colleague. we just would be very concerned if there was a sudden line in the sand that said there should be at least 25 officers for every 500 people. that somehow that would seem random, and somehow it would seem unavoidably hard to mandate and to ensure that you get uniformity across the system that you're trying to achieve. >> i think government's first responsibility is to protect the people of the community, period. the first and most sacred responsibility of any government, besides -- notwithstanding their size. but minimum staffing levels are something that need to be looked at. very, very harshly looked at. most major cities have 2.4 to 2.8 police officers per 1,000. my jurisdiction, which is a very

urban jurisdiction has less than .5 law enforcement officers per 1,000 in the county jurisdiction. and it does cause problems. it reduces the amount of contact with the community. it puts the officers in much more of a dangerous situation. and also i think uniformity in the ptsd response in the country. south carolina is a state where like colorado, where ptsd is not recognized as a workman's comp injury. and officers can be forced to eap programs but they're not designed to deal with ptsd. so uniformity in those areas would be a wonderful recommendation from this task force. >> i would just like to comment, based on one of my recommendations recommendations would every law enforcement officer be equipped with a vest. small departments maybe considering consolidating and making regional departments may

be looking at a different level of support for those smaller departments that aren't able to come up with the matching funds for the investmentvests or don't have the capacity or folks that can apply for the grants to get those vests. having that support at a higher level for those smaller departments would be very helpful. >> okay. do any of our task force members have additional questions? if not, then thank all of you for your testimony, and please join me in thanking them officially here. okay. we're going to take a break until 2:15, thank you.

come inging up, a conversation with american urban radio networks reporter april ryan on her book "the presidency in black and white: my closeup view of three presidents and race in america." then a news conference with china's foreign minister. after that a hearing on safe drinking water in rural areas. and later a house homeland o security committee hearing on u.s. counterterrorism efforts.cent ann ryan joins us she's the author of the recently released book "the presidency in black and white: my up-close view of three presidents and race in america." we'll be talking about that book. i want to start withwe w the president's trip this weekend to selma. id thi what did this trips mean, not just to this president but the american presidency as a whole? you were there, you saw the president's speech. >> not only was i there, i got ai there, ride down to selma on air force presid

one with the president. i was part of a group of five black journalists who interviewed the president.jo we got one question each in the conference room.of t it was a lot of race questions, most of them were race sidency questions. but what it means to this nation and the presidency, john, race house plays and has played throughout ey hav the course of history and at the white house, and for each president they have dealt with issues of race. they deal with issues, war to in peace and anything in between. and in between that is race. so this president talked about the prior president who reauthorized the voting act. the republicans presidents. you had former president george w. bush on the stage with this president. race matters. this is a part of the fabric of the american history.tage issues of race. bloody sunday was definitely a e pres piece.blac because, and in my book "the presidency in black and white" i have a piece about selma, chapter 4.ba andy young ambassador andy

young, went on the record and rsatio talked tons me about the g conversations that he was involved in in with dr. king and lbj about pushing forward with the voting rights -- >> the congressman and the former ambassador? >> yes yes. and the former ambassador, aid, congressman, andy young, in the book, he said that lbj said thathave he did not have the power at the time to push for voting rights for it to pass. so what they did strategically, they said, wen okay. they went and went down to alabama at a time when you couldhave t not have three african-americanscaus on the street together because of an ordinance there. and they figured out a way. they met with amelia boy ton. and the rest is history. we talk about that in the book.s is but race has played throughout history. >> this is a topic you care so much about, one that you've covered for so long, over nearly 20 years at the white house now.ident, >> yes yes. s >> when you have one question with the president on this like stion? you did on air force one, what's

your one question? >> well my one question was, as race is such an issue -- and in ok the book and researching the book, for the book, i found thati found there were many people many of the leaders in this country found that there were three pillars in this country or and markers, racial markers. you have emancipation with proclamation with abraham lincoln. you have civil rights act and peopl voting rights act with lbj. many people say we're in a post-racial america. i asked president obama, would you consider us, once you leave, post-racial or post-obama? people are starting to talk about aipost-obama. he said to the fe, yes, and i'm paraphrasing what he said.ry, but he said, yes, my election was historic. but he does not equate his presidency to all the legalities that change the course of so discrimination that changed history in this nation. so he said, yes, my presidency within itself is historic. but he says what he's doing now closi is closing the gaps of where

discrimination, you're finding it in wealth and housing all those, he's trying to close the gaps. based upon the historic decisions or rulings or laws on that were made when it r comes to race. >> so does it surprise you with new polling coming out from cnn, say 4 in 10 americans say race relations in the united states have gotten worse under the black pr nation's first black president? >> it depends where you sit. i i mean, if you feel it immensely, you feel it and you're going to speak out about it. the president -- i asked the last question at the 2014 press conference and i asked about out th race. the state of blacke america. and he said in the aggregate, all america is doing better during his presidency. but it depends. if you are without a job, if youepends are hurting -- and that's one thing i find. if you are hurting financially, if there's at'hurt, you will speak out. that's when there's a disease-ease in this country. >> the book is "the presidency in black and white: my up-close

view of three presidents and race in america." april ryan is our guest for about the next 45 minutes or so here on the "washington journal." if you want to call in as t we talk about this topic phone s are numbers or the screen.on (202) democrats 202-748-8000.202) 748 republicans 202-748-8001. interests 202-748-8002. outside the united states, want to join the conversation about race in america 202-748-8003. april ryan in your book you ook, y rank theou three presidents that you have served at the white house for in the press corps in terms of their grades on some of these issues.th and the rankings might be a bit your b surprising. talk about who comes out the i best in your book. >> it all depends on which issue. overall, i gave president nt clinton a b-plus president barack obama a b-plus. and president george w. bush received a c-minus. and his c-minus -- i want to hitgave a that point.

the only reason why he received a c-minus is because he had a faili failing grade of "f" in one of the categories. and that failing trade was die, katrina. any time you have people who die -- people not one, two, three. people who die. then you have a people who felt disenfranchised, felt their country did not stand up for them or was there for them.till f that received aee failing grade. that issue alone. and we are still feeling the effects of katrina ten years this year after katrina. particularly for the new orleans community, the ninth ward. president clinton received a there w b-plus. yes, he could have done more there but there are things that he did and things that he didn't do. and president barack obama, it'sma is in interesting with his grade. i changed his grade while i was in the process, when i was in the galleys. and i changed his grade because at first, you see a big difference between first term barack obama and second term.m. particularly second term fourth quarter barack obama versus th qua first rtterm.

this president had to navigate the waters successfully and strategically. because anything that he would have done to target african-americans would have been viewed by some groups in a y some very negative light. and, you know, you cannot discount the stats and the fact that there are disproportionate numbers when it comes to roport african-americans inio this almost country. in almost every area.area so -- and i give -- i changed the grade because this -- right w, we now, we're in this area where ing ab this president is really coming out talking about race.eting he'sis trying -- he's targeting issues that have been a problem for decades in this country. speaking of the mistrust between minority communities and policing. he's trying to support police asking well as root out some of the evildoers. he's also talking about voting rights and things like this. so that's why i changed his erent grade. i boosted it up a little bit. because you see a different

obama when it comes to race now. >> you brought up the issue of are we in a post-racial period? you talk about in your book the expectations that were placed on president obama right after he k an was d elected. i went back and found a shelby steele column from the "l.a. times." november 5th 2008. talking about the expectations right after president obama's election. i just want to read you a piece of this to get your sense of the expectations here. for the first time in human history a largely white nation has elected a black man to be its paramount leader. does this victory mean america is officially beyond racism? doesn't it imply a post-racial america? shouldn't those of us, white and black, who did not vote for mr. obama take pride in what his ho victory says about his culture even as we mourn our political loss? how could a decent person not hope for all of these possibilities or not give america credit for electing its first black president? talking about the expectations then and now. wo >> ird like the word "hope" in

that article.t even the expectations then were -- he couldn't even rise up to the at he level of expectation hesa set for himself. it was almost like he was the savior. people viewed him, particularly the african-american community he did something no one else did. he was almost viewed as a ' savior. but he's not.man. he's human. i mean tim we were at a time when we were in a recession we were really starting to fall into recession. gas prices were climbing up to $4 a gallon.es were we were also at a time when we were seeing war. the pain of war. war. financially and physically. the death toll was rising.ve and he was i talking about change. hope that you can believe in.e and he really made people believe ithis. he said, i'm pulling you out of war. aim going to fix these problems. but, you know, you never know what happens. you can't predict. and there is no handbook for that office, for the oval office. so anything can come and happen. but i don't think he could have reached his expectation, the

level of expectation he set.uman so he's human. all of them are human. and i believe they do -- they go into the job doing the best that they know how to do. and i believe that they want to ry. really help the country. but it's how they view it. >> your book might be considered something of a handbook for presidents in how they deal with issues of race -- >> i don't know about a handbook. >> why did you write the book? >> why did i write the book? i have a friend who really, really encouraged me. he's in the media as well.nto th he said to me, when i first got this job -- and i fell into the and do w job. he said, look you cannot sit here and see what you see, do what you do hear what you hear and not write about it. he said, you have to journal. i was journalling. ith journaled and journaled and o young journaled. then we compiled the book during the clinton years and it wasn't time. i was too young, too fresh. during the bush years we had a bite. but the person who was working that w with us, giving us the contracts, got fired.

so that was a no then. but my agent and i, diane nine, we looked at one another. during the obama years we said, it's time. and it sure was. and roman and littlefield said book h let's do this. and the book has totally changed from its inception to now. and i'm very thankful for diane nine and roman and little field for making this, for birthing diane an this 17-year-old baby into the world. it took 17 years to write. and i'm very proud of this. and the crazy thing about this book that i love, in washington,s you know we say, sources say. sources say. but in this book you've got admi presidents on the record.have pre you have president barack obama on thed. record. you have bill clinton former president bill clinton on the e record. former first lady laura bush on bunch the record. i could name a whole bunch of people. former head of the equal opportunity commission.ghts.

head of the equal opportunity commission. excuse me commission of civil rights i'm sorry. the head of the commission of ple. civil rights mary frances barry. a whole host of people. >> including some of the press staffers that -- >> yes. >> -- you went back and forth with over your time. the book is "the presidency in black and white." fubt if you want to talk about that the issues of race and how presidents have dealt with race. selma, the anniversary this weekend. we're talking with april ryan onaller in "washington journal." b fleetwood in baltimore, maryland, to talk to you, line er: for democrats. fleetwood, good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> good morning fleetwood. >> caller: good morning. th this is just a statement more than it's anything else. i got out and i voted for president barack obama. i mean you know i did consider the fact that he was black but i voted him to do a job. and he's done exactly what i wanted him to do. e he's tried to stay away from these wars. i'm a vietnam veteran. i'm sick of hearing about wars and the trains of war.

but i also am a taxpaying citizen. i worked all my life and i'm i did retired now. i didn't take one food stamp. i haven't been on welfare and all that other crap. but i voted -- i pay taxes, and i expect my congressmen and my senators to represent me. i did not see a republican congressman or senator -- i might be wrong it's not saying -- but i did not see them down there at that march, which ar was important to me. you know, at 66 years old i know what i went through for civil rights and voting rights. and i expected them to represent me. if they didn't show up to are th represent me whoey are they representing? >> you were down there at selma gu can you talk to some of those issues? i >> i d did see republicans and repub democrats. it was heavier with thede democratic side than it was the is ve republican side. but i believe it'shi very political at this point. you have republicans and

democrats that note the history saying, yes, this was wrong. bloody sunday was terrible. it was worse than terrible. it was an atrocity. but at the same time there's a fight about voting rights. so how do you move forward and we authorize it? so i believe that because there is not a coming together on that, they did not want to -- this is my personal opinion -- send the message that they were in support of it by being down s there. so it is -- it's a sad day when politics really rules and instead of coming together and dealing with an issue in history that really is profound, that really changed the lives will , and change the country and change the lives of so many."was >> a column in today'shi "washington post" by e.j. dionne about this, specifically the voting rights issue where now selma, king's agenda remains unfulfilled, i point that out tot viewers if they want to read about that. there was the photo that was used in that picture in color xter i there on ours screens for our

viewers.ca dexter silver spring, maryland, line for democrats dexter, good morning. >> caller: i'm calling from acklash maryland. andblac i think it's just a backlash against blacks in general.ted. since obama's been elected. h i voted for him twice. and i was hopeful that america would rise up and get past this racism in c this country. for me it has gotten worse. ever since he was elected. and i don't blame him for it i think it's just the backlash against blacks in general. >> thank you, dexter. there is a segment of america that did not want this president as president. but there's a segment of america that may not have wanted him, not because of the color of his skin, but because they did not want his agenda. . but then you do have that segment. i hear it.s list i hear you know -- i was listening, driving in, to a radio program.r

and a major gospel singer was h it. talking about how she her daughter has to deal with it with some of the girls.irls, th she hears the girls talking about the racial component at their school.ople t and i've heard many things.walks i've heard a lot of people tell me, just in my walk through life, on their jobs, that they ral work in a multi-cultural say, environment. and people say, i don'tli like that obama. and they think they assume because you're black you instinctively or immediately voted for him.that is and that's not always the case.rican but you can be an african-american and support this president but don't always says. agree with everything he says. you can be a republican who supports a republican president there and you don'tha necessarily agree with everything he says. but there has been a little bit of a backlash because of -- i'm not going to say a little bit. there has been a backlash in this country by certain sects or sectors that didn't like the fact that this president is

here. and some of it a lot of it's from race. >> for viewers who are unfamiliar describe what american urban radio networks and what you see your role as in you covering the white house for the past several decades. >> my role as a journalist is just that, objective. an objective journalist who tries to were i in all sides, not just two sides of the story. all sides. and i'm not an activist journalist. j i ask questions on every issue. but primarily focusing in on minority and urban america for urban radio america networks. we are a minority-opened, the oldest and only minority-owned that h radio network that has radio programming, news programs, radio stations, things of that nature. really, we are, basically, a o minority-owned company who basically puts out news pertaining to and programming

pertaining to urban and minority ame america, particularly black america. we have over 300 some odd very stations across the country. we are very aware of our we ar heritage and who we are. as a company and what we stand host: for in this country. >> and talk about your experiences at the white house, specifically you take a lot of pride in the fact that you started in the sixth row in that briefing room that our viewers see as they watch the briefing. r >> i've worked hard to move up. gu >> have movedes up to the third row. what does that mean? >> that means -- the further ely yo back you are the less likely you're going to get called on. if and if you're coming in on a daily basis, if you're there if you've got a booth, if you're are r really there andea in the pool, traveling with the president in town and out of town doing things. you are not really seen in that all t back row but you're putting in all the work.i so i was there and i'm thankful to steve sculley, c pan when he was president, he began the move for me. he moved me from the sixth row t to the fourth row on the end.

and then karen bow han moved me up smack dab in the middle, former president of the white house correspondents i' association. and i've been there. t and i've been there for 18 vvied years. and it'supy sad that the room is divvied up with a hierarchy. the radio is -- i call radio the bastard child of white house reporting. but it's tv it's wires, then you have the newspapers then you have magazines, then you go down to the lowly group of radio. so there are a lot of radio folks now on the second and t third row. and i'm proud to be one of that you ar number. >> do you take it personally when you don't get called on? >> oh yes. it's ego, some. but -- you have a question but it's about your work.questi you have a question that may not be the same question that everyone else has. and, you know, they can be asking about isis or benghazi or the e-mails or netanyahu.

i want to hear about that.t, i'm going to do that. but you're not going to ask about the nigerian girls necessarily. you're not going to ask about the new labor stats that affect minorities. who did proportionate the number still is. they're going to ask that. i'm going to cover that but hose q they're not going to ask a lot of my questions. >> airborne ranger on our twitter page weighs in on this conversation. modern presidents have handled race on a business as usual basis, maintaining status quo. in a word poorly. every one is what airborne ranger writes.our gu we're talking with april ryan, author of "the presidency in black and white." part of the pool there at the white house, the press corps that covers the president every day. your questions and comments. ronda's waiting in reynoldsburg ohio, line for democrats, good morning. ron dashes ronda, are you with sinus jim's waiting as well on our line for independents in chicago. jim?li good morning to you.

we'll hold off on calls for just a second till we get them back. i want to continue talking about your experiences in the press corps. and what you've asked for from presidents. the questions that you give.y. specifically on the issue of an you apology for slavery. lot a it's something that you talked apart lot about in your book and something that was a big part of bill clinton's presidency and a specific trip to africa. can you talk about that? >> yes, former president bill clinton, he really -- i want to thank him. he really -- i was in harlem in is off his office last year. we did a great interview.we s we spent ame long time talking. and when he was president, john, he said to me he said you q know, you're going to get me in trouble with your questions. a lot of times theyon don't know what to expect when i ask a question. so i think that's a lotomet of the reason sometimes they don't call on me. but he told me that. so it made me feel good. i kind of took that -- took that

word from him to let me know, this is how it's going to be. but when it comes to the slavery apology, i asked the president that because he was the president who was considered the first black president and then he had this historic trip to t had africa. and thenth -- >> we're showing our viewers some photos from that trip specifically at the -- >> the door of no return i'm getting goose bumps looking at the door. i've been in that door three . times for three presidents.retu it's amazing'm ge it's the last look for africans who leave that country to be enslaved, to come wherever they go around the world.d but he at that time also, he race i embarked on this very bold ng to initiative, the race initiative trying to bridge the racial divide get people talking about race. as he knew that the nation was browning. and we were changing as a , our ma nation. as who weing were. out our makeup was not going to be what we started out as, it was changing. so he wantedd people to

understand that it was a hard issue, not necessarily legislative, but a hard issue sta and ifrt legislation needed to come, maybe so. he wanted to talk about that. but when you start talking about that race there's that one ck-whi dynamic, the black/white dynamic, that's always out in wi front. and how can you t talk about that without dealing with the root ofs how the problem?avery, t and that's how the apology for kept slavery, the question kept emanating in the press they t conferences, in the briefings. and they tabled it.t he thought about it but they tabled it.were f and many -- thereac were factions within that white house.re for, some were for, some were against. and then he even said -- we had inner. a soul food dinner with him -- whe >> one that your aunt cooked for him. >> my aunt. you read the book, yes, john. my aunt pearl. she cooked. and he said you know, one of the problems is that black people could not come together on this issue. and that was an amazing statement to me. >> why? >> because -- to hear an

american president say that he's getting all these different comments from people within the black community, instead of coming together in unison -- it ge the could have changed the course of history. we could have ha cd an apology, o's so things could have changed i lot don't know. but it's something that i've canno heard as a child that a lot of an pre times we just could not come together on issues. and to hear an american people president say that. you had black people within his white house in the administration saying yes, some saying no, then you had the white people in the administration, some saying, hm,happen i don't think so. i was told many times it was not going to happen. i mean, they had written language that was so strong and then pulled back on it when it go was t time to go to talk about the issue of slavery. when he was at gory island, whenf he gave that beautiful speech in senegal. so that's kind of why the big issue of an apology for slavery was there during bill clinton.

george w. bush, will you apologize for slavery? no, i will not apologize for slavery because africans participated in the slave trade. americans did the same.ica sh he felt because so many people participated, america shouldn't apologize. i mean, why not apologize for what happened? what this nation allowed to an happen? >>iden can this president do it? should this president do it? >> can this president do it?. i doubt it. i doubt if he will. i think it would be -- i really doubt if he would.k it wou but if he wanted to i'm sure he could. but i think -- i think it would send a bigger message if there were to be a president who is not necessarily african-american to do something like that's andmo i think -- any president could do it. a i think it's more so about a president, not necessarily the color. but there are different resident underlying issues fund this

president were to do that. >> let's try jim again in chicago, illinois. line for independents. jim, good morning, you're on with april ryan. >> caller: good morning april. >> good morning, jim. hica >> caller: i'm from chicago and go i've been following barack obamasinc ever since 1995. him a and i never voted for him as a state senator or a u.s. state senator because, number one, he y di was reallyd not that active in l the black community. and he really didn't -- did eems l little or nothing for the black community. as president it seeps he cares more about illegals and gays than minorities that live in chicago or other parts of the country. i'm very, very disappointed with hop him. i was hoping that he would do something great for the black community. even though i didun not vote for him. but unfortunately i think a lot of people are very disappointed with him. >> hm. i cou well i can understand. that's, again, the level of expectation. this president will go down in history as the rights president for the lgbt community, commu

definitely. and jim make at good point.make the level of expectation i thinkectati is what he's going to. and again, he had to navigate the waters strategically. and for this first term to get irst t the second term. because if he had focused in so much on race, if he had really targeted in on race a lot, i d ha don't think he would have gottent thin the second term. i don't think that -- i don't think that anything that p he for in would have done would havest passed. i mean for instance look at all the ground swell that came up after he started talking about skip gates early on in his administration, beer summit. they stopped that fast. that happened by mistake once.t' then they squashed it. second term, it'sho all or nothing now. he's movingsp forward. >> how do you respond to jim who writes on twitter, why do you refuse to believe that it's his policies and not his skin color in the majority who voted s poli against him did so because of his agenda and not race. >> i like that question.

okay, well i find it interesting that you have a president who -- the economy is re the getting better. and i'm not saying this is a supporter or someone who is not su supporting him. i just find it interesting, looking at the racial dynamic as well as looking at the policies he pol of other presidents. we're climbing out of recession. osama bin laden was killed. we still have terror but osama bin laden is gone. sti the economy is better. i mean you know, people are wanting health care. he did something that no other hat no president was o able to do. joe biden did get it right when he said this is a big hm deal. you may not like his policies but he has been a president who has moved and done things that no other president has done. so i think you see his hue more so than you see the policies, for some people. and that's the unfortunate thing. >> wake forest, north carolina.

james is on -- another james -- e the line for republicans. >> before we go to james i want to let you know that i'm not t saying this in support of him orjust against him. i'm just saying just looking at it from a historical standpoint,es and looking at it -- some of his policies are not the best but he's president of the united states. >> james, you're up. >> caller: yes. good morning, miss ryan. i think maybe you dopr likees the president but it's not about liking or disliking the person. it's his policies.anyw but anyway.alling a a million things i could say all of a sudden. but what i called about was, you mentioned grading bush on his situation towards black folks in america. and -- >>er no, i said katrina.hat' katrina, katrina katrina. >> caller: right, right. that's where i was going. you brought up katrina, because of katrina. what did he have to do with that? the governor told him to stand

down. told him to stand down. he was on tv five days before the hurricane saying, look, this is a cat 5, folks get out. it's not good. and then yaum blamed him for blowing up dikes and this. and one last thing. you were there in sell mark correct? >> yes. >> caller: the fabulous picture of obama and all his -- all his supporters and the folks in selma. bush was in that picture too, was he not? >> yes, he was. yes, he was. most definitely. not only was president bush in t that picture, he was on the stage. president obama even gave credit to president bush for reauthorizing the voting rights act. now, let me go back. i want to -- i thank you for this call, i really do.i e presid i actually personally -- i liked each one of the presidents. clinton, bush, and obama.am a j okay?ou as people. i'm a journalist, okay? i have to work with -- it's about relationships in

washington.his. and i want to talk about this.presiden in the bush chapter i talk about how president bush was nots. the person who many people imagi believed he was. he was not a racist by any stretch of the imagination. actually, i think kanye west got it totally wrong. it and i do believe that this president was caught up in the tics o politics off the republican party. states' rights issues. when it came to katrina. now, he is the head of the republican party.lican he is the leader of this country. now, katrina was going on. brownie went down there and did re and an abysmal job. he did -- the job was horrible. and what he thought was going on was not going on. people were left homeless, people were left to die on rooftops. any time that kind of thing in happens, that is horrible. in this country, now, this president at the time, george w. bush, he felt wit. he kept going back and going back. so did the first lady. i traveled with them on the first year anniversary. i traveled with the former firsth

the lady at the timefi down to mississippi to see those who were displaced out of new orleans. we went to churches where they wer were housed.one so so that is one piece of it. he has done so much.nt who but a lot of people -- for one, he is the president who is known to have done more for africa than any other president. but i believe, and i say it in this this book.use the because the african-american e repu community did not vote for him his party, the republican party and those in the administration kind of just called the black , community a loss.doing. so they did not promote what he was doing.did th now, there were some things that he did, a lot of people didn't agree with particularly. condy rice, the then national security adviser, when he did the a.m. may does brief on the llin university ofg fo michigan calling for no preferential treatment indmissi admissions. so there is a mixed bag.who but i do believe that george w. g up bush is a president who got hunge up in the politics of the ty. republican party.

i see george w. bush in a different light than other people saw him. so iny gi this book i really give him a lot of credit. so i would like for you to get d the the book and read the bush host: chapter and then come back and olks u talk to me about that. >> for folks to understand the grading system that we're that y talking about, some of the areas that you grade on when you're coming up with your overall grade, administration, diversity, apology, reparations for slavery domestic outreach for bush that included katrina international outreach where you gave george w. bush an "a," hiv/aids in africa was the topic there. then jobs and unemployment, specifically how it affects minority communities. you can see that and understand the breakdown of the grades at a you the end of the book "the presidency in black and white." chris is waiting, the line for independents, you're on with april ryan. >> caller: good morning, folks. can you hear me? >> good morning, chris.

>> go ahead. >> caller: excellent. long-time listener, first-time caller. to get the cliches out of the way. profe yes.ss i guess i'd like to start by commenting on professor skip gates' book. are you familiar with it? >> let's talk about his book, go ahead.t: >> caller: okay. remember he did the sunday morning talk show circuit, did the colbert report, did "the daily show." and one of his signature lines t was about presidential poet laureate -- oh, what -- what's her name? >> poet laureate? >> chris, got a lot of callers, what's your question? >> caller: maya angelou. >> the late maya angelou yes. >> caller: yes, excellent,

excellent, we're all familiar with her. he said that -- remember his ngelou book was based genetics and race. and he said that she was in fact, 85% caucasian. >> okay. >> chris, do you have a question? we lost chris. we'll go to sam, alexandra, virginia. line for independents.or good morning. . >> caller: good morning. >> good morning.orni >> caller: you know, april,ng i'm sitting here and i'm listening, you know, to all these people. first of all, i'm a 70-year-old black man who spent 25 years of his life in the service. from 1963 to 1988.88. >> thank you for your service. >> caller: when i hear this ionshi question about race and bring relationships in this country it brings to mind my service in vietnam, 1964 to 1965.

and guys like me you know, born in north carolina, raised up in brooklyn. when i joined the military in 1963, you know i was off you know, to do the country's back all bidding. i wore the flag of this country on my back all over the world. two distinct times or periods of time when i was asked, why does u.s. a black man fight in the u.s. military? one time 1968, the other time was in 1988, when i was stationed in germany. when that germanwh asked me that cause my heart stopped.ze because it made me realize. a lot of people realize that your service, particularly as a ar black orou a brown person is not really, you know, accepted. when i look at pictures of that bridge, it brings to mind my

uncles, my cousins, who fought in world war ii and world war i. they weren't treated very well. >> i got your point. i got his point.poin what you're sayingt. is you go to fight for this country, you come back, there's still discrepancies and disparities ts t and you still don't have all they corr rights that you feel that you should have, am i correct?ec: >> the caller hung up go ahead. >> and i've heard that from so many people. you fight for the country the country that you love, you're very patriotic. come back, you still have problems getting a home because of your race.declined or getting -- being declined credit. or having -- can't find a job.-- the you know or you're underemployed. there are issues in this country that still need to be fixed.i thin i think that's what the president talked about.hy that's one of the reasons why george w. bush was there, because he sees there are still we' issues' we, our o ur ecountry, we have got to and l open ouroo eyes and really look at the facts. and look at it really

accurately. and not get upset -- the issue of race is something that we are so scared to touch because we'red put hypersensitive about it on every side. and if we can come down and put the facts on the table and just thin talk and have a civil discussion, i think, you know, things would bear out out differently than they have over the years. >> peg writes on twitter racism was hidden and whispered about until our first black president then it boiled up to the surface and became apparent.an anthony's waiting in flint michigan. line for democrats.ll. anthony, good morning. >> caller: wow thanks for taking my call. >> good morning. >> caller: i was wondering if she noted that when the drumbeat for -- u netanyahu or whatever came up, and they applauded. get this guy was going to get money for a war. now, all of these things that are important to americans like in flint right now, we've got a real big water problem. and these people want to come here towi straighten that out.uded the

but they applaud the drumbeat of war. i'min wondering if those lenses marin she's looking through, and i'm a former marine, are rose colored. because i thought that use i everything that happened in louisiana was atrocity. >> i believe i did say that ho things that happened in new orleans, they were an atrocity.et fro >> the sentiment we get from callers is the amount of money that goes overseas as opposed to gues money spent on community-building here in america. >> yeah.re aarea there's still areas in thiss cou country that are really -- that he w you'dou be surprised. you would think it was in another country. but there are pockets of pockets poverty, pockets of hurt, in this country. and that's one of the problems.ynamic that's where the racial dynamic -- i mean, i don't understand. we're just blocks from the hill. i don't understand how -- i'm with along with the caller, how things can not be seen or dealt

with, other prons come to the surface and you still have hurt.are you still have schoolhouses that are crumbling. kids using outdated books. you have water systems that are ystems not right. you have homes that are not fit no to live in. i mean yout mes have roads in communities that are a mess. hav you have communities that are not protected from different elements. there aree is issues that bear out -- issues of race that bear ustrat out inio everything. and i understand the caller's frustration. that is one of the reasons why i wrote t wrote this book. race is in everything. and the unfortunate thing is t that those kind ofalki issues that this gentleman was talking about, they don't make above the fold on the "new york times" or "washington post" every day. they don't make the a-block or ev b-block of the nightly news. and that's why we are here -- >> the first question at a press conference? >> exactly exactly. that is you wait a couple of questions and that's when the race that i question may come up or something on issues of race. that's one of the reasons i wrote the book. people said, why would you ask

this president questions about race? why not? anything comes to the president, from water, peace and everything in between. race is that in between. people think the issues of race like this caller, don't matter. that's why this book is here. bill clinton in my interview with him, he said, race does matter. race does factor in the white house. but when you hear it in that the w briefing room, you don't get -- not it doesn't reflect that.race d so race does play a part. and that daily white house mix with the senior advisers on different issues we just don't hear about it. >> let's head out to missouri. randy on our line for democrats. good morning. >> caller: goodca morning, april and john. i've got a compliment and a couple of questions.lly wa my compliment, i really want to thank you for bringing up issues that's related to people of color while you were in that white house press briefing. whi it's not the only thing that you've pursued. who d but you're probably the only one that does keep it in the forefront, especially when people are watching the white

house press conference. >> thank you. >> caller: that said. now, you know, when i hear this, these polls about during the racism president obama election racism has grown or exposed.hing let me suggest something. especially to white call there'sblamin call in with this other ignorance. blaming president obama for y expose exposing their racism.they b the election of president obama truly exposed their own racism and they blame him for it. and that's like a bank robber blaming a bank for having money one ro for him tobb rob. >> do you think there can be those who disagree strictly on the policies of this president? or do you think race always -- >> caller: they can have that. but if you listen carefully, you'll hear it. here, let me make my point.out that when people are talking on about president obama's inability to work with congressfactorin

especially republican congress i i don't see how you can say that without factoring in what gurati transpired on january 20th 2009 on the inauguration night of this newly elected president. where these 15 u.s. congressional people got together and plotted to destroy him. the onset of the worst financial crisis. thus you're destroying america. >> april ryan, i want you to pick up on that, particularly this president's relationship with congress. >> that's interesting. many people saying he has ting inability to work with congress.ork well, i remember being in the and a briefing room and asking g -- i questions of this president when democrats were screaming he room a won't talk to usnd he's meeting with republicans and he won't tell us. where is this coming from?s are and i remember the president has gone golfing with john boehner.he has t so, i mean you know he has worked -- he has tried to work take with the republicans. i mean, there is a natural give and take. there's a follow back and forth wn. in this town. but there's an extra. there's a little extra piece in

these last six years. and this president -- you know, he's got his faults, definitely. but he's got his positives. and i believe that he has tried to work with congress. i mean to the fact that the h democrats were very angry with him at one point feeling that ause t he was giving in to them. and then at the same time that he was meeting with them more so. so there's thiss th crazy dance in ars. washington. i think it's gotten a little crazier over the last six years. and i do believe that again, race is a factor. >> let's head back to michigan. westland, michigan. marty's waiting, line for republicans. marty, good morning. >> caller: so thank you so much for taking my call. well, first -- i want to say, you know the health care bill was passed with no republican support. and ramped throughee the congress. and i've seen clinton work with ing the republicans passing health care reform, getting things on whe done. hillary clinton getting th e same opposition when she pushed

health care. and it's just insane. i would say the attitude of the congress is o a reflection of leadership. there's no leadership. and let me say we say the ion pe economy's getting better. there's 92 million people out of work. 60 million people with no insurance.119 tr $61 trillion of state debt. $119 trillion of unfunded debt n that my daughter's next ten daughters will be paying for, ten generations of my kids. $8 trillion -- $4 trillion of debt under bill clinton -- >> no, i -- >> caller: barack obama, now -- >> let april ryan jump in here. >> let me say something.i'm i think the debt was wiped out during the clinton years if i'm correct. i remember wearing a button -- ing ou not wearing a button but the clinton folks were sending out buttons, "zero debt." a black button with white "zero debt." feder >> deficit versus debt here?gues

>> deficit yes. federal deficit was zero. clinton years, the modern era . the clinton years were the best e i guess economically. and then we went down in the bush years with the wars. d now we are dealing with the repercussions of decisions made g from years ago. t and i guess this president is nce he trying t'o pull us out.nt i mean, it's a dance that he's got to do. any president, whoever is the president, would be president, an it could have been mitt romney, it could have been john mccain they would still have to deal ng us with the same issues of trying to do the dance of getting us out of the economy. so we have to think it's not all just one president. you have to think back, go back the years, see what's led up to why we are here. and yes, there's some things e that are policy. yes, health care. health care was made during thisministra administration. it wasn't made during theot m bush ush years or during the clinton years. health care reform is here now. so that's on him. that's his legacy piece. but the other issues, financially in the economy, that goes back. so whatever he does now now

it's on him. but he was dealing with the first couple of years, dealing with the residue from another c president. >>ing trying to get in one more call, lawrence in bronx new york, line for republicans.rning. lawrence, good morning. >> caller: yes, yes. good morning. two things i'd like to say.y >> go ahead. >> caller: i am very disappointed as a republican.appointe i'm very disappointed with the republicans yesterday.t show why they didn't show up at selma. and they keep talking about oh the middle class and poor people. and i'd like to know from you if you think, and don't be afraid to talk -- >> don't be afraid to talk, okay. >> caller: if you think that if many republicans in there are still thinking this man -- what

his name -- are still thinking like the jim crow era. they act like it. i am very shamed to be a republican today.inute. >> lawrence, let's let april ryan take that in the last minute. >> wow, it's gone so fast. i will say this. the republican party is tryi definitely trying to correctng therying to errors of their -- the last few years. they're trying to be more to do di inclusive. at least they're reaching outin tooing me and trying to go out and do different things. you've got -- i heard rand paul is going to poe weebowie state. you've got the republican party trying to reach out because they realize that this is a nation that includes so many different people. not just white lu nmales. so i say this to you. if you're very disappointed as a republican, i say to democrats if you're disappointed as a or democrat you reach out to your leaders and tell them that. make it known.o spea

and we'll see what happens with the reaction. but you have got to speak up to your party leaders.t care you've got to speak up -- i don't care if you're democrat, kn republican, what have you. you have to speak and up let them knowup your dismay or your support. that's let them know your dismay or your support. that's the only way that things will change. and aut >> april ryan, author of the book "the presidency in black black &white". we appreciate you stopping by "the washington journal." >> i love it and i thank you for having me, john.

the promotion of a drug actually starts 7-10 years. while it's illegal for a company to market a drug before it's approved by the fda, it's not illegal to market a disease. so drug companies have, sometimes, invented diseases or exaggerated the importance of certain conditions and then blanketed medical journals and

medical meetings and other venues with these messages that are meant to prepare the minds ofically missions to accept a particular drug or accept a plar condition. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on cspan's q&a. friends from the press, good morning.

on this day, a year ago the mh-370 flight went missing. a year has passed. a plane has not been located, but the search effort will continue. today musz be a tough day for the next of kin of those on board mh-370. our hearts are with you. >> translator:

>> mr. minister you once said that 2014 was the year of harvest and all-around progress in china's diplomacy. can you elaborate on that and what we can expect from china's diplomacy in 2015. what are the key words we need to watch.

indeed 2014 was a year of harvest for china's diplomacy. under the leadership of the cdc central committee successfully hosted the apeck meeting in beijing and left a deep imprint of our own on the history. we took an active part and played china's role in international and regional affairs, we made energetic efforts to expand external

operation and initiative and the 21st century maritime winning support from a lot of countries. by the epd of last year, we have established a number of regional organizations and bassically established a global network of partnerships so one can say that china's circle of friends and partners has widened and will continue to expand.

in 2015, we will continue to forge ahead while steadfastly safeguarding our national interests, we'll work to expand the interests that we have incumbent with other countries in the world. the keywords in china's diplomacy in 2015 will be one focus and two main themes.

our key focus in 2015 will be making all around progress. we will further the policy communication with other countries, expand the convergence of our shared interests and explore effective

avenues of win-win cooperation. we are confident that the initiative will win even more support and deliver even more early harvests so as to cat liez the revitalization of the duration continent as a whole.