bob james, aarp here in new hampshire. i'd like to ask you a question on social security not so much for myself a graduate of world war ii and the great generation, but for my children and their children. to strengthen social security or at least tell them that they're paying every month into it. will it be there for them? >> you know it was a poll years ago that said more kids believed in ufos, they'd see a ufo than a social security check. i once had a plan to deal with social security when i was in the congress, which was to go to a wage base to start people at a somewhat lower level, which they don't know what level they're going to start at, and that would put them in a position to make social security that and a few other things and i think george bush had a plan very similar to that am i right, judd and john? and it was kind of rejected. and now, ago you get farther and farther down the road, the challenges get greater and greater. sir, let me -- i don't have a social security plan in front of

me, but it's going to have to be changed. all the entitlements are going to have to be changed. but we should not look at this as a meat cleaver. we should think about in the 21st century a better way to modify all these systems. medicare, let me tell you what we're doing in ohio in medicare it's run on the basis of quantity not quality. we had money to deal with asthma. keep kids out of the hospital for asthma. what we found out is we were successful. hospitals had few servicities. okay. therefore they had less revenue. the insurance companies didn't pay as many claims. they had more revenue. guess what, we were able to get the insurance kwps and hospitals to share the benefits so that we keep kids healthy and at the same time drove down the cost of medicine and everybody is a winner. we have to think creatively in

my opinion in dealing with the problems of medicare and social security. let's figure out this system, but it has to be changed. we can't just say you can't tinker with it you can't change it. that's not realistic. that's putting your head in the sand. and anybody who's going to be president needs to answer this question, are you willing to deal with it? if you're not willing to deal with it, you're not fit for the office, plain and simple. i'll have a plan for you no what thor -- matter what i do. i'll think about it a little bit, yes, sir. let me just say one other thing about balancing the budget like with medicaid. here's the answer to this in my opinion. the federal government should set goals. they should stop giving us prescriptions out here about how to do things. they can't get out of their own way. what they ought to say is we have some goals. states, you go ahead and do it. when judd was governor, he could figure out exactly how to reengineer a program.

our job raintraining program. you know our job training programs which are vital to train people, you have to be unemployed to get the bulk of the money so you can then get employed. why don't they give me the money i need to train people on the job so i don't los them. this is how confounded the government s they can't figure out where to hide the smallpox vaccine. people jumping over the fence at the white house. the secret service is in disarray. the va can't figure out how to pay claims. they need to do what they need to do at the federal level that we can't do for ourselves and give us the ability to come up with solutions once they establish the goals. that will help us to get to a balanced budget and help reenergize our state, our community and our people.

yes, sir. [ applause ] >> john, it was a pleasure working with you when i was in the house, and we worked on the penny kasich commission which tried to cut 2% from the federal government budget, and we pail failed. as you recall. what i enjoyed about you then was you were always a straight shooter, and i want to give you an opportunity to be a straight shooter here with us this morning. >> i don't know if i like where this is going. >> i would like you to tell us what are your defacttractors saying about you? where are they wrong and where might they be a little bit right where you believe you still have work to do? >> hmm well i didn't know i had any detractors. [ laughter ] you know i'd say that there's, that's a good question. i mean, i don't want to get into psychoanalysis, but sometimes people say you know, he's not

disciplined and not focussed, okay? how do you go from $8 billion in the hole to a $2 billion surplus, a loss of 350,000 jobs to a gain of almost 350,000 jobs, tax cuts at $3 billion, dramatic education reforms, helping the poor, if you're not disciplined and focussed. i do have a lot of energy but you know, energy allows you to accomplish significant things if you don't have any energy, if you don't have the push, how are you supposed to get things done? and the other thing is i'm always kind of in the future. now i'm always thinking about what can be because ideas are what bring excitement. i don't care whether it's in business, sports politics or whether it's in religion. look at how this pope's shaken up the whole world because of his ideas about the way things happen.

my idea is you get a short time with me and you might go wow, what the heck do we have here? well i'm an energetic guy. and i'm not going to change it. you know, as age will probably change some of it, but, decki make mistakes. we all do, but i try to get up and, you know i just try to think about what i can do to just make things a little bit better. does that, i'm the farthest thing from saint hood, but that's my goal in life. shake myself off and try to do better, and i tell you, i've learned in this job. our president they'll be the first to tell you. my waive said, john, you're the leader, the dad now act like it. you don't need smart alec comments and those kinds of things, but i also like to have fun. you know the interesting thing about politics? if you're having fun people don't like it. they resent it. and one final thing, one final

thing. you know why i'm unorthodox, dick? because i'm normal. okay? [ applause ] okay. what is that it? okay. >> thank you, governor. thank you for being here. thank you all. [ applause ] >> dude, do we have a, can you

get me a pen? there we go, there we go. >> one more. >> thank you. where do you live? >> new hampshire. >> i figured you were from new hampshire unless you snuck in from massachusetts. >> thank you so much for coming. >> thank you. >> thank you lawyer. >> you're welcome. >> oh, it's right here. >> been waiting a long time for you to come back. >> it's great to be back. i love to be here. it's a great state. it's fun. it's really great. what are we doing? >> questions. >> okay. who are all these people?

all right? what do you want to know? >> governor. [ inaudible ] >> oh, i'm not, you know, you think i'm going to answer that question? are you kidding? look, the fact is, is that i'm thrilled to be here, to be able to talk about my state talk about the kind of things i think we need for the country. all my options are on the table. i'm obviously traveling more, probably build a little more infrastructure, but i'm not ready to make a decision on this and listen, i got to tell you all, this is not cat and mouse. if you decide you want to go for some sort of a job like this it takes a lot and it's not something you do cavalierly. i had a conversation with a man that thought about running for president, ultimately decided

not to. his vice to me is make sure it's right for you. decide this when you want to decide it, not when some expert or pun dits or whatever tells you. i understand the realitying of delegates and all the other things, but at this point, i don't know. and i would not get in this if i didn't think i could win because if i didn't think i could win, i'm not going to call on my friends, my family and everybody else you know, to brakeeak their backs on something that's not achievable. but most of the decisions are personal, but i have not made a decision yet. [ inaudible question ] janet, i was too young, too inexperienced. and the people who talked me into doing it, they wanted me to go out and try it once just to have the experience and they never thought i could win. but they never told me that. i thought i could win.

so, look it takes a lot of energy. it takes a lot of discipline to do this. and takes money am i mean takes all those things. and good ideas. but, you know in that race people were hungry for bush. they were hungry for george with. >> w. bush and they got him. i'm in ohio which is a big state and that gives you certain advantages in firms of raiseterms of raising money. i don't think i would be in a position to have enough money to run a whole national campaign but can you raise enough money to get your fighter jets off the deck of the aircraft carrier to go up and see how you do. and if you do well there i think things progress. but i'm not a campaign manager. i'm only a governor of ohio.

>> in 2000 john mccain won new hampshire on a get money out of politics ajen dpa. we've had hundreds marching across the state as part of the new hampshire rebellion. i think a lot of people are hungry to see that issue addressed. is that something you've built into your platform? >> probably not. i've got too many other things i want to talk about and i am going to continue to talk about in terms of leadership and the things i talked about today. whether i run for president or whether i don't i'm not going to go away. i'm not going to fade away. i'm not going to disappear, and i will have things to say. i just want to help improve my country. money and politics, i don't know how you deal with it. let's figure out if there's some practical way to deal with it because frankly i don't like the power of money to influence decision-making by anybody. for me you give me you know i

had a fund raiser in cleveland, and a guy got up and said i got good news and bad news. the good news is we raised a lot of money. the bad news is, is if you gave them anything you'll get nothing for it. but i have a different approach to all this. >> some think you are a little unfocussed because you have a lot of ideas and a lot of energy. separate from that is it not also possible because you're out there and as candid as you are, you're upsetting the applecart? >> i'm a normal guy who has a big job. i don't think of myself as anything particularly special. carl, if i think something, you know, i don't mean to just blurt something out but if somebody asks me a question on social security or, i'm going to try to answer it as best i can. because i got one life to live here on this earth. and i'm just going to try to be, you know, answer the questions.

be direct. be a leader. that doesn't mean to be rude or be in a position where you're just blunt. i'm not interested in that. but i am interested in trying to solve problems. and you have to look at a problem and try to solve it. people could raise questions about problems that i can't solve, okay? i don't know how to do it yet. that doesn't mean we won't figure it out. but at the end of the day i think i said it best. i'm a normal guy in a big job. all right, i used to have a friend a young kid who passed away. i became buddies with him. and he wrote me a note one time and he said to his mother -- my wife and i got to be very close to him and his brother and the whole family. and he wrote a note one time and he said john kasich is nothing more than a kid in a congressman's body. i'm a happy person. i like myself. i'm comfortable with myself. and i'm pretty mormal, you know? in an abnormal profession.

okay. thank you all. on the next washington journal, green wire legal propertier jeremy jacobs previews supreme court arguments that will decide whether the epa should have considered compliance costs before implementing strict power plant standards. national journalism fell low discusses the future of fraternities. then a round table discussion with washington post reporter lydia depillis. as always we will take your calls and you can enjoy the conversation at facebook and twitter as well. washington journal live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. this sunday on q and a, eric larson on his new book "dead

wake", the last crossing of the lusitania. >> the question gets difficult when the question arises as to what ultimately happened to the lusitania, why was the lusitania allowed to enter the irish sea without escort, without the kind of detailed warning that could have been provided to the captain but was not. and this has led to some very interesting speculation about was the ship essentially set up for attack by, by churchill for someone in the admiralty. and it's interesting. i found no smoking memo, and believe me i would have found a smoking memo. that is to say there was nothing from churchill to jackie fisher or to somebody else in the admiralty saying let's let the lusitania go into the irish sea because we want to get something. nothing like that existing. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern

and pacific on c-span's q and a. the senate judiciary committee held a hearing on sally yates as the next deputy attorney general. she was asked about mandatory minimum sentencing. the president's executive order, human sex trafficking and countering violent extremism. sally yates previously served in georgia. representative john lewis and johnny isaacson of georgia provided introductory remarks. and i think we're going to let start with congressman lewis. normally we would make opening statements. but, because of your time schedule, i think we'll start with you to introduce congressman lewis and then we'll go to senator isakson and then we'll go to senator purdue and then we'll have our opening

statements >> we're honored you're here, congressman. thank you for joining us. [ inaudible ] i'm -- well thank you for your statement on how important the senate is. but the constitution -- >> we're upper only in our own minds. >> the constitution recognizes as equal but i was going to call on you first because you are the senior member here today. and you've been a respected member of the house of representatives. and you know ms. yates and so i have chosen, right or wrong, to start with you. and i hope you'll start. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. i'm delighted and forever pleased to be here. i'm honored to be here with my friend from the georgia

delegation, senator isakson and senator purdue to introduce the united states attorney for the northern district of georgia, sally yates, who has been nominated to serve as deputy attorney general of the united states. you might say sally yates' dedication to public service and the law is in her blood. because both her father and grandfather served in a georgia -- on the georgia state court of appeals, her father was one of the great lawyers in the state of georgia, and in our nation. she is principled, tough for the rule of law, but has used her commitment to equal justice to strengthen law enforcement ties with the community.

she graduated with honor from the university of georgia, and began her career in private practice at a law firm in atlanta located in the heart of my congressional district. there she tried 15 cases as the sole lead counsel. in one of her first noble -- notable pro bono victories, she recovered property wrongly taken from the first african-american land owner in barrett county, georgia. in 1989, she began her storied career in the united nations attorney's office. over the next two decades she was known for her aggressive work, fighting violent crime, combatting human trafficking, cyber crime and gang activities. it was on her watch, mr. chairman, that the u.s. attorney captured and prosecuted the infamous terrorist who

bombed in 1996 olympics in atlanta. five years ago, miss yates was unanimously confirmed as the first woman u.s. attorney for the northern district of georgia. she took a unique approach to leadership. her first action was to go on a listen tour to hear from the people she would serve. she made it clear, she made it crystal clear, she made it plain, she made it simple, that her mandate was simple, evenhanded justice has served the highest interests of the people. her leadership was tough. but fair. and in this time the link between law enforcement and the community has become so strained. sally yates made an effort to reach out, and she continued to

reach out. under her leadership u.s. attorney office organized a youth justice summit at georgia state university. a straight talk student forum initiative with community and schools in georgia. a youth advocate advisory council to meet with high school student leaders. and a street law and mock trial program with atlanta john marshall law school. she hosted public discussion with georgia's governor and the chamber of commerce on the barriers facing formerly incarcerated individuals. she worked with the urban league, moore high school of medicine and the state board of pardon and paroles to establish a 12-week program to provide job training counseling and interview advice for parolees

returning to the community. in the last year, citizens across the country have let the nation know they believe law enforcement is not fair and reports are now verifying that some of their concerns are valid. long before these problems came to light, sally yates led her office to build community relationships. and she's still doing it every day. she knew it was important, very important, not only to seek out and prosecute crime whenever she found it, but to create an understanding of higher justice to serve us all. mr. chairman and ranking members i introduce in this committee a true champion of justice. a true champion of what is right.

what is fair, and what is just. a leader who is a woman of principle, compassion, and faith. a daughter of atlanta. a citizen of georgia. miss sally yates, who i believe will make an outstanding deputy attorney general of the united states, and i support her nomination. thank you. >> thank you, congressman lewis. now, senator isakson. >> thank you very much, chairman grassley. and i am pleased to share the dais with john lewis, a georgia hero and his own legend of civil rights in our country. it's a pleasure to be with him. and i'm happy to wish him his 75th birthday which is this saturday night. happy birthday, john. >> thank you very much. >> i hope you have 75 more. >> i hope so, too. >> i hope i do, too. you know i've had the chance in 37 years of elected office to introduce a lot of georgians in a lot of different venues. i've never had one i looked forward to more than today in introducing sally quilian yates

as the president's nominee for the deputy attorney general of the united states of america. i have known sally yates, her husband comber for a long long time. he is here with her today as well as her children kelly and quill. i'm sure she'll introduce them more fully. sally is a great hero for the state of georgia. for 25 years she's been in the office of northern georgia, prosecuting all kind of things like the olympic park bombing. for five years she's been the chief attorney and proven herself over and over again to be effective, to be fair, to be diligent and to be the kind of person you'd want representing you in the u.s. attorney's office. sally is a graduate of the university of georgia school of journalism, and later a graduate of the university of georgia school of law. she's what we lovingly refer to as a double dog. bulldogs are the mascot of the university of georgia, and she has her two degrees from that school. when she graduated from law school she graduated magna cum laude in her class, one of the highest honors that can be bestowed on anyone. she's been referred to by many as tough and tenacious but to

introduce her i thought i would quote from mark twain whose famous quote said when confronted with a difficult decision, always do what's right. you'll surprise a few and you'll astonish the rest. sally yates is going to astonish the united states of america. she is exactly what this country needs in the u.s. attorney's office in washington, d.c. she will be a hero of the american people, a hero of what's right. she'll call them like she sees them and she will be fair and just. she is a lady of impeccable taste, integrity and record and i am very proud to second her nomination today and defer now to david purdue of the committee for his remarks. >> thank you, senator. thank you, mr. chairman. it's my distinct honor this morning, mr. chairman, to join senator isakson and congressman lewis to welcome sally yates and her family to the judiciary committee this morning. i want to echo their words and my colleagues this morning regarding miss yates' qualifications and her distinguished career in federal service. for years she has prosecuted the most violent criminal organizations in georgia. ms-13.

and other notorious gangs. drug cartels, human smuggling, sex traffickers. the department and the people of georgia are fortunate to have benefited from ms. yates' work in the service of justice for so many years. so today i join my colleagues in welcoming her to the judiciary committee, and in congratulating her on the honor of this nomination. it's my privilege this morning, mr. chairman, that as a yellow jacket to welcome this bulldog to this committee. thank you. >> thank you both senators. and you're free to go if you want to go. otherwise we'd be glad to have you listen to us, as well. ms. yates i welcome you to the senate judiciary committee. it's been a big day for you and your family. congratulations on your nomination. today we will consider the nomination of sally yates to be deputy attorney general i would start by noting that she's already doing the job. she's been nominated for.

she's been serving as acting deputy since the beginning of the year. so she already has some experience with leading the department. and has been exposed to some of the challenges the department faces. before her service, as acting deputy attorney general she served in the u.s. attorney's office for northern district of georgia for over 25 years. including five as the u.s. attorney, so she also has experience in running an office, and important experience as a prosecutor. too often when nominees appear before our committee they avoid answering questions by claiming that they aren't yet on the job, so they aren't in a position to provide responsive answers. however, because ms. yates has already been on the job for a few months, i assume she'll be able to answer questions about the department for us. i won't repeat all of my concerns with the way the department of justice has been run in the past six years because i outlined those

concerns very thoroughly in miss lynch's hearing. but my concerns remain. so i'll be interested in discussing these important matters with ms. yates today. she obviously has a lot of impressive experience as a prosecutor throughout her career. she's been involved in a number of discussions on criminal law issues, one thing that i'm going to discuss with ms. yates about today is the position she's taken regarding mandatory minimum sentences. for example, in testimony before the sentencing commission she said, quote, mandatory minimum sentences increase deterrence, and cooperation by those involved in the crime. end of quote. she also called mandatory minimums as, quote, essential -- quote, essential law enforcement tools. end of quote. and argued that mandatory minimum sentences have helped reduce crime rates. finally, let me say just as i'm hoping the next attorney general provides an independent voice,

and works to depoliticize the department, i have the same hope for the deputy attorney general so i'm looking forward to hearing ms. yates' perspective on the current state of the department as she provides her testimony, and answers to our questions. i'll be listening in that case for changes that she would make to the department, and improvements she'd implement to make it more transparent. the department of justice remains deeply politicized, and i'm hopeful that the next deputy attorney general will have what it takes to make some changes badly needed. with that, i now turn to our distinguished ranking member for today, senator blumenthal. >> thanks, mr. chairman. and thanks for conducting this hearing in such a bipartisan and gracious way. first of all, i hope at some point we're going to clarify all this stuff about bulldogs and yellow jackets, and, i come from a state where we have a school that has a bulldog as a mascot

but i don't think you're from that school. we welcome you anyway and today is a very proud one for me as a former united states attorney, and as a former attorney general of my state and one who like a number of us on this committee has a background in law enforcement, because i think you really epitomize the best of a public interest lawyer, and a law enforcer, fair, just, honest, as mr. lewis referred to you. and i also think that you have gained the respect of the people who are maybe the most critical judges, the folks who are on the streets, fbi agents, and dea enforcers, and postal inspectors, and secret service who have contacted our committee and who have spoken through others to say how much they have respected your work and admired

your tenacity, and your toughness. but also your essential fairness in enforcing the law. and those qualities, as you and i have discussed in our private meeting, will be critically important because the role of a prosecutor is not only to obtain convictions, but to achieve justice. in the words of justice jackson, and i am paraphrasing, not quoting, the department of justice faces enormous challenges ahead. and new leadership will be important to that direction. but i want to say how much i appreciate the leadership that we've seen from attorney general holder. i think he deserves gratitude from our nation for his leadership during a very tough time. and i'm hopeful that we will confirm his replacement very shortly. loretta lynch is eminently well qualified and i'm hopeful that we will move quickly to your confirmation, as well.

i look forward to supporting you and i want to just say finally my thanks to your family, who are here today. comer, kelly and quinn. i know that your son and daughter may not have always believed that your edicts were to quote congressman lewis right, fair and just. there were perhaps moments when your directions were questioned by them, but i know that you're proud of them, as they are extremely proud of you, and i want to thank your husband for his public service, as well as yourself. thank you very much for being here. and thanks for answering our questions today. >> before you speak, i would like to swear you, please. do you affirm that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> i do. >> okay.

you're free now to make any opening statement you want to make, and also to introduce family, friends, and anybody else that's proud of your nomination that you want to introduce to the committee. >> well, thanks very much -- it is an honor to appear before you today. i'm very grateful for this opportunity, and grateful for president obama's nomination. i'd also like to thank senator isakson and senator per due and congressman lewis for their kind and generous introductions. i am truly humbled by their confidence in me and am grateful to them for their remarkable lives of service to our state, and to our country. it's particularly meaningful for me to appear today surrounded by my family. my husband comer and daughter kelly and son quill. i'm not only grateful to them for their love and support but i'm also incredibly proud of each one of them. my husband comer, a lawyer by

training, followed his heart and now runs a school for children with learning disabilities and children who are deaf and hard of hearing. my daughter kelly is in her first year as a special education teacher in north carolina. and my son quill is a sophomore in college, where he is studying political science and environmental policy. my only regret is that my parents, both of whom have passed away, are not here today. they instilled in me a love of the law, and a call to public service. i come from a long line of lawyers. lawyers and methodist preachers. even my grandmother was a lawyer. in fact, she was one of the earliest women admitted to the georgia law -- to the georgia bar. but law firms weren't hiring many women to practice law back then, so she served as a legal secretary instead. my father and his father before him were state appellate court judges. and they demonstrated by example that the law is an instrument for ensuring that right is done in the world.

my father died shortly before i graduated from law school. i vividly recall him counseling me then to think about the job that i was going to pursue when i graduated from law school. and to make sure that the work that i chose when i graduated was more than just a job or a way to earn a living. rather, he believed that we have an obligation to use our legal education for the greater good. and he encouraged me to find a path where i could make a real difference in the world. that path took me to the department of justice. i joined the u.s. attorney's office in atlanta in the fall of 1989, and the department of justice has been my home ever since. when i joined the u.s. attorney's office i certainly didn't expect that i would still be with the department of justice 25 years later. but once i experienced the privilege of representing the people of the united states, of getting to do what i believe is

right and fair and just in every case, anything else would have been just a job. bob barr, then the u.s. attorney for the northern district of georgia, entrusted me with my first position in the department, and that was that of a line prosecutor. i began the way all young prosecutors do. investigating and trying cases, working with agents and witnesses, to ensure that those who violated the law in the northern district of georgia were held accountable and that our community was made safe. over time, my cases became more complex. and i assume leadership positions within the office. chief of the fraud and public corruption section. first assistant u.s. attorney and first female u.s. attorney for the northern district of georgia. i carried with me the values that were instilled by my family. that the law can be an instrument for good but only when it's applied fairly and thoughtfully and objectively. i believe that it's a credit to the institution that i love that

i have held leadership positions in both democratic and republican administrations, and that i've witnessed career men and women of the department consistently following the facts and the law with great distinction, and without regard to politics. over the years i've seen the department from a variety of vantage points. i personally prosecuted public corruption, regardless of party, and led our team to holding accountable the olympic bomber eric rudolph. as a supervisor i've ensured that our office had the expert and resources and focus to go after the worst of the worst. whether they were international gangs, human trafficking rings, or cyber criminals. and as a united states attorney i was vice chair of the attorney general's advisory committee where i gained additional insight about the challenges that each u.s. attorney's office faces across the country. challenges that i expect that you all hear about from your constituents every day. when the president nominated me, a career prosecutor, to serve as

the deputy attorney general of the united states, it was the greatest honor that i could imagine. i'm proud to say that in the brief period during which i've served as acting deputy attorney general, i've seen on a national scale the same skill and care and dedication in our attorneys that i knew back in the northern district of georgia. in taking on the day-to-day operations of the department, its $27 billion budget, and 114,000 employees, i also understand that we face critical national security and criminal justice challenges. i believe that we can work together to face these challenges. and in my role as the chief operating officer of the department, i'll be committed to ensuring that the resources that congress provides to the department of justice are used as effectively as possible to protect the public that we all serve. i know that several of you have served previously in the department and share my love of

this great institution. as you all know, the department of justice is unique among cabinet agencies. it is and must be independent and nonpartisan. we don't represent an ordinary client. and as the representatives of the people we must always be governed by doing what is just. this has been my life's work. and if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, i can promise you that i will spend each and every moment guided solely by the department's singular mission to seek justice. thank you, and i look forward to your questions. >> do you want to introduce family and friends? >> yes, certainly. this is my husband comer yates. my son quill yates. and my daughter kelly yates. >> and any friends and family you have here you want their name in the record we'd be glad to include it if you give us that information. >> thank you, senator. >> we'll have seven minute round

questions. first round, second round will be five minutes. i will start. in the last year i have asked the attorney general four times to disclose the office of legal counsel's opinions regarding the lawfulness of the president's various controversial executive actions. in response to my first letter the department refused to provide all olc opinions, but said if i had any concerns about a particular executive action, i could follow up. less than two weeks the president then released five senior taliban commanders. those so-called taliban five, without notifying congress, as he was required to do by statute. so i took the department up on its suggestion and asked for the legal advice dodge provided before the decision was made to release the taliban five.

six months later, the department responded to me and instead of providing olc advice, it provided a document that the department of defense gave the government accountability office in an after-the-fact effort to defend its actions. of course we all remember the government accountability office had concluded that the administration had acted unlawfully when it released the taliban five. now, that document isn't good enough. it's especially disappointing considering that the attorney general sat before this committee last year and assured me he would look for ways to get this information to congress. so my question on this subject, would you provide this committee with the opinion of the office of legal counsel that had authored on this matter, and whether, in memorandum or less

than formal format the information before the senior taliban commanders were released without congressional notification as the law requires? >> thank you, senator, for the question. and your question touches on a critically important issue. and that is the issue of transparency. it certainly is important that the people of the united states, and this body, and that congress, understand the basis for actions by various departments of the united states government. and we're committed to getting you the information that you need to understand the basis for those actions. i think traditionally the actual olc, office of legal counsel, opinions themselves have traditionally not been disclosed. and that's for good reason. we want to encourage the agencies and the executive branch to come to the department of justice, and to seek counsel, and for there to be a full and frank exchange of information and ideas. and just like a standard attorney/client relationship, don't want to have a chilling effect on that.

and so while we are absolutely committed to getting you the information about the underlying rationale, i think we generally follow the position that has been followed throughout the department of justice, and many administrations, to decline to provide the actual olc opinions themselves. >> then i assume that you would not give me the opinion as i requested? >> i'd certainly be happy to work with you and your staff about making sure that you have the information that you need. and that you would like. >> but not the opinion. >> i'd be happy to talk with you about the underlying rationale. >> i won't get the opinion? >> i don't at this point believe that there's a reason to revisit the decision about the opinion itself, senator. >> in other words the decision has been made that congress can't have the opinion, and so we won't get the opinion, is that what you just said? >> i don't have any present intention to revisit that decision now. but would be delighted to work with you and your staff to try to get you all the information about the underlying rationale

behind that. >> then let me follow up with this statement. because the administration has released other olc opinions. so i don't accept the idea that the administration can pick and choose which of these opinions it might release and which it won't based on perceived political interests. the department of justice explained the legal reasoning that it used to justify executive amnesty. we've seen that that's very flimsy argument. it seems to me the department owes the american people an explanation as to why it advised that the president could reach the taliban five without notifying congress as the law requires. so i intend to follow up and ask you about this in my written questions, and citing some sort of vague privilege is not -- is not good enough for me. but, you and i had discussions of how important oversight is

for me. and so, just so you know, it doesn't -- it isn't reasonable that some olc opinions can be released, and others can't. and you can't -- you don't want to revisit that. now i want to go to another point, because i just have two minutes left, this will probably be the last question i can ask you at this point. your testimony before the sentencing commission in 2010 stated that as a result, in part, of mandatory minimum sentences, and abolition of parole, crime rates were dramatically reduced. you related that the experience of law enforcement is that, quote there are tangible benefits to law enforcement and public safety from mandatory minimum sentences, sentencing laws, mandatory minimum sentences increase deterrence, and cooperation by those involved in crime, end of quote. you called mandatory minimums

then a quote/unquote central law enforcement tool. additionally you stated that judges were exhibiting quote, undue leniency for some white collared offenses, and some child exploitation offenses. end of quote. and you recommended that it might be appropriate to create some new mandatory minimum sentences. but at some later time you gave a speech saying we, quote, we can't jail everybody, end of quote. that prison spending was reducing other doj spending and that we can't afford to have so many people in prison. so question, you served as federal prosecutor for over 25 years. do you stand by your 2010 testimony that mandatory minimum sentences are, quote, an essential law enforcement tool, end of quote, and that they quote, increase deterrence and cooperation by those involved in crime, end of quote? >> senator i believe that

mandatory minimum sentences are an important tool for prosecutors. but i also think that we have an obligation to use that tool as effectively and as efficiently as possible. i'm a career prosecutor, as i've made clear this morning. and i certainly wouldn't support anything that i believe would undermine public safety. but i also know that we have a serious fiscal reality that we are facing now. and that is that our prison population is exploding. and as a result of that, resources that would go to prosecutors, and federal agents to be able to investigate and prosecute crimes, are being diverted to the bureau of prisons. the bureau of prisons now takes up almost two-thirds of the department's budget. that's really untenable and unsustainable. so i believe that mandatory minimum sentences are an important tool. but we -- but that we need to use that tool effectively. >> senator blumenthal? >> thanks, mr. chairman. at the outset i'd like to ask permission to include in the record a statement from senator

patrick leahy, our colleague from vermont, in support of ms. yates' nomination. >> without objection. >> and i'd also like to include a number of letters, i referred to them earlier, from colleagues, law enforcement officials, officials in georgia, in support of that nomination. >> without objection those are included. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just ask you about olc opinions, ms. yates. it's been a tradition common to, i think, most recent administrations that olc opinions generally are not released, is that true? >> that's certainly my understanding, senator, yes. >> thank you. let me ask you about the bureau of prisons and mandatory minimums. my understanding is also that the policies on this issue have gone back and forth. i can remember a time when everybody was against mandatory

minimums. then they were adopted by many states. my own feeling is that we really need to do more research and study on what is effective in deterring wrongdoers and law breakers in this area and just use the most effective, cost effective policy and you've rightly cited the costs of incarcerating convicted criminals beyond the point where it makes any difference to rehabilitation or deterrence. i assume you'd be open to that kind of research and study? >> absolutely, senator. while i believe mandatory minimums have a place in our criminal justice system, i believe that the most current research indicates that it is the certainty of punishment that really has the greatest deterrent effect. not necessarily the length of the sentence. >> and, in particular, you made reference to the very sizable amount of the department's budget that is spent on the

bureau of prisons. my understanding is that one of the growing segments of population are actually women prisoners in the system. in fact, in danbury, connecticut, the bureau of prisons is constructing a new facility and i'm hopeful that i can follow up with you on construction of that new minimum facility in danbury, because in november, 2013, bureau of prisons estimated that the construction of this facility would take 18 months, and the new facility would open in may of 2015. that construction has been delayed. i think in that facility and others around the country, there's a question about whether we're providing the kind of environment that makes for not only fair, but also effective incarceration, and so, i hope that you would be willing to

work with me, and consult with me on that issue. >> absolutely, senator. i would look forward to that. >> on another issue, that is important i think to the administration of justice, the department opened a criminal investigation concerning the gm ignition switch and the circumstances surrounding that company's failure to disclose the defects in the ignition switch which ultimately caused injuries and fatalities. i think the number of fatalities now is approaching 60 according to ken feinberg of the compensation fund. i hope that you will work with me and other members of the committee also in bringing that criminal investigation to a prompt and just conclusion because i think that the decisions to be made by those victims of the gm ignition

switch over whether they accept the compensation fund awards will depend on the conclusion of that investigation, certainly deterrence of the kind of alleged wrongdoing that occurred, concealment, and even potentially fraud against the united states government, really depends on an effective conclusion to that investigation and i hope that you'll work with me on that investigation, as well. >> certainly. and i appreciated your raising this with me when we had an opportunity to talk last week. and if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed i would look forward to working with you on this issue, as well. >> let me ask you in conclusion on this first round of questions, as a newcomer to your position, not to the department of justice, let me give you the opportunity to talk about where you think your priorities will be, whether it's human trafficking, or organized crime,

or national security, or terrorist threats to this country, and where you think that the resources of the department could be and should be enhanced. >> well, thank you senator. certainly we face a number of challenges at the department of justice. and national security in keeping our country safe from acts of terrorism always is and must be our number one priority. but we have other challenges, as well. certainly, cybersecurity is a very important issue for us. we are seeing that it impacts really the full specific tum. international security issues, critical infrastructure issues. issues with respect to private industry and our own personal privacy, as well. so cybersecurity is certainly a critically important issue for our department. there's another issue that i think that we also need to focus on now and that is really our relationship with law enforcement. i've been fortunate to be able to work with all levels of law enforcement for the 25 years that i've been a prosecutor.

both state and local law enforcement officers and federal agents, and i think strengthening that relationship will be an important priority for us. i hope that i will be able to bring the perspective of the field, and assessing our priorities. because using our resources, in the most effective way possible, is a critically important priority of the department of justice. i think we also need to make sure that we are bringing that focus to our investigative agencies. it's important that we not be generating stats that actually having an impact on the communities that we serve to make them as safe as possible. one of the things that i would like to do is to work with our law enforcement agencies to ensure that they are focused on making an impact on the safety of the communities rather than just, as i said, generating stats. >> thank you. and part of aiding local law enforcement is determining what kinds of equipment, training, really makes a difference to local law enforcement, and

assessing carefully and accurately what will be of greatest assistance to them in dealing with the vast variety of challenges they face. >> that's absolutely right, senator. and, in fact, just last week, i was fortunate to have a meeting with the head of many of the local law enforcement organizations. the purpose of which was not for me to talk, which is sort of a change for a lawyer, but actually to listen to them. and to hear from them their concerns, and their priorities, and how we can work together going forward. in the most effective way possible. >> thank you very much. my time is expired, mr. chairman. thank you. >> before i call on senator cornyn, i want to go to the agriculture committee for 15 minuteses. we've got enough people here to ask questions, so would you take over according to -- till i get back? so it's my understanding, it will be cornyn, and then durbin

if he comes back, and then purdue and then lee. is the way i think it works out. >> ms. yates congratulations on >> thank you, senator. >> and certainly have an impressive career. in public service, and have all of the qualifications to prepare you for being the deputy attorney general, and i take seriously the advice and counsel of our colleagues, senator per due, senator isakson and their testimonials to your public service and congressman lewis, as well. i guess the biggest problem someone in your position has when they come to washington, d.c. as a prosecutor is the politics. and the ambiguity that seems to exist too often in my view about the role of the chief law enforcement officer of the united states, the attorney general, and i would include high level appointees like you.

about where your loyalties lie. and you've been very clear about your dedication of the law, and pursuit of justice, and that's very admirable. but sometimes, here at the highest levels of the department of justice, and this has happened in republican administrations and democratic administrations, because you serve at the pleasure of the president, and you're confirmed by the senate, and you, when asked a question about the law, sometimes you get a political answer. could you just explain to me your perspective on where your loyalties will lie? given the fact you are appointed by the president, serve at his pleasure, can you tell the president no? >> well, thank you for the question, senator. because i think you have raised obviously a critically important issue, and that is the independence of the department of justice. i can tell you very simply where my loyalties lie, and that is to

the people of the united states and to the constitution. that's what i've been doing for the last 25 years. during the time that i was an assistant united states attorney and as u.s. attorney, i actually specialized in public corruption prosecutions. you have to stand up to some powerful people when you bring a public corruption case. and that's what i've been doing the balance of my career. as i said, i've been doing this for a long time and am committed to the department of justice and to the cause of justice, and i'm not going to give that up in the last two years. according to a unclassified threat assessment from the texas department of public safety, this has to do with cartels that control human smuggling, and drug trafficking, according to this unclassified threat assessment, mexican cartels control most of the human smuggling and human trafficking routes and networks in texas. the nature of the cartel's command and control of human smuggling, and human trafficking

networks along the border is varied, including cartel members having direct organizational involvement and responsibility over human smuggling and human trafficking operations. as well as cartel members sanctioning and facilitating the operation of human smuggling and human trafficking organizations closed quote. do you agree that transnational criminal organizations control much of the human trafficking.