car they can't launder the money. so they buy them. you see car lots in the state of virginia or baltimore. you go there and see the cars sitting there and you never see anyone in the car lot. ask yourself, who is running the racket in they season the cars on the lot. they is the there for a few days, and then they're off on a railroad boat to west africa to lots owned by hezbollah. >> the cars around $2500? >> a lot of cars are below the $2500 customs threshold. so they don't come into the statistic statistical data base. >> so they know how to beat the system? >> they know how to beat the system. they're really brilliant, actually. >> and how are they being paid for? cash? >> no it's typically wire transfer. so the banks are involved, you know, and this is an issue. i don't want to blame the bankers. they're trying very hard to enforce and given huge

responsibilities to do so. what we need to do is target the lebanese who are sending the money. and we need to say this typology, which is subject to section 311 of this patriot act is ha money laundering type technology for terror and it shall be banned until it can be proven otherwise not involved with terrorism. >> and you say this but to get these, how are are they being used? >> they're being driven around nigeria perfectly elicitly by relatively poor people who want a cheap car. there's nothing wrong with the cars themselves. what's wrong is they're buying them as part of a money laundering scheme. >> i'm in the car business is the reason i'm asking, and i want to talk to you later. okay. i yield back my time, chairman. >> chairman recognizes mr. sherman for five minutes. >> much of our u.s. government is doing an outstanding job. some agencies aren't. ch i've got an example that may

beat the ones of the witnesses. an example where giving money to terrorists is not only easy, it's tax deductible. i brought to attention the organization thatst a 501c organization out on the website give us the money and we'll give it to viva palestinian, and then viva palestinian will give it to hamas. it took them four years to take it seriously. then in october 2013, the organization put on its website, the irs report as to why the organization should lose the tax exempt status, and used it as a fund raise device saying the irs doesn't like us. give us more money. we'll give it to hamas. and even today somebody who looks at the list of organizations to which they can give tax exempt contributions can give it to the ifco.

so i think just the fact that we make it a little easy for the terrorists, we make it tax deductible. re remittances. a lot of ordinary americans want to send money to their relatives in somalia. would it make sense to green list licensed organizations where you know if you give them the money the money will go to an individual somali relative? now of course there's always the possible that your relative has been seduced by terrorist propaganda and gives some of the money to terrorists. but at least the money gets to the relative of an american. does it make sense for the united states government to to give americans an avenue where they can feel relatively safe? do we have a witness who wants to answer that? >> can i address that?

>> yeah. >> well, somalia is a very good example. i mean, many, many somalias rely on remittances to feed their families and keep going. so it's an essential area of income for them. and of course in somalia there are not operating banks. so many of these are made through -- and so on, informal systems. and you notice the other day that after the risks for attacks in kenya kenyan government wanted to shut down some of these remittance services because they reckoned they were also funding terrorism. of course, there was a huge outcry internationally because it would mean so many somalias were disadvantaged. i think your question is absolutely right. what needs to be done is to bring the informal systems into a more formal structure rather than banning them and trying to push them out. one of the problems we face is formal banks are very unwilling to offer banking systems because they fear the regulations and so on.

one of the best way isis's finances ever is seizing a lot of currency. what various countries have done is they've issued new currency, replacing old bank notes with new bank notes. this is incredibly inconvenient for criminals in baghdad, just as it would validate the bank notes stolen by isis. first, does anyone here have a good estimate as to the value of the bank notes seized by isis? i've heard various reports. i don't see anybody -- >> i think it's very hard to say. i mean, in mosul they were alleged to have stolen $500 million worth, but you know, whether that was in gold or bank notes or --

>> you would hope that the iraqi government would at least know the gold and currency had in the bank before the american arm troops ran and left the money for isis. but it goes beyond that. the government is paying salaries to bureaucrats in mosul, and that money is freely taken by isis. it's my understanding and i don't know, mr. barrett or any other witness, that the iraqi government is sending electricity into mosul free. and then isis gets to collect from the yew tillty users. and i get conflicting arguments or propaganda -- well i don't want to use the word propaganda, spin from our government. half the time our government or the iraqi government are

boasting they're undermining isis' support by making it impossible to provide good governance. the other half they're saying we want to make sure they're lives are comfortable. finally, there is the oil that the professor spoke about, the oil wells. it's hard to -- we can bomb the oil wells. have we chosen to not do that because we want to make sure that mosul motorists are not inconvenienced? >> so the bigger question is after you bomb the oil wells who is going to hopefully take back that territory in a legal matter, this is a bigger question in terms of legal infrastructure. because you're taking a look at the supply chain just like any business. >> i know we're bombing the oil refineries. i asked about bombing the oil wells. we didn't hesitate to bok

factories in france in 1941 and 1942 when we were serious. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maine for five minutes. >> thank you, i appreciate it. and thank you all for being here today in dealing with this new dimension of terrorism financing. i encourage everybody to continue to do good work to make sure the country stays on offense and make sure we do everything humanly possible to stop the flow of terrorist groups that threaten the homeland. i'm a little bit concerned as we go doing this path that all now we see a marriage between organized crime and terrorism and additional source of funding to terrorism. and i know all of us in the country are getting increasingly alarmed by the savagery we see in the middle east in particular, dealing with these organizations. i would like to follow up with you, professor if i can. with mr. lynch's question.

dealing with the administration's negotiations currently. with respect to a nuclear deal to iran and if in fact sanctions are lifted that are currently imposed on iran freeing up roughly 125, $150 billion of cash to that country what might that do with respect to the increased marriage between organized crime and terrorist funding, and in particular, could you walk us through the best knowledge knowing you have a background in international banking and international security. what would happen next? >> to one of the concerns several of us looking at different scenarios of how the iran nuclear deal might turn out, one of the objections of several who are quite, i say proponents of the sanctions regime. the sanctions brought the iranians to the goerkting table. that is clear. more importantly the iranian economy is so suffocated now

because of the sanctions. one of the scenarios that the iranians would like is immediately upon signature of the agreements that there be an automatic lifting of the sanctions. and it's very hard to put back in place the genie out of the bottle. the bigger issue, too, is you have now a global sanctions regime. and you know the u.s. issues sanctions as well as you and other countries and more importantly an international level. once you have countries hoping to do business with iran, not necessarily the united states, see the opening of the lifting of the sanctions, it will be very hard to actually hard to apply apply, what are these so-called snap back sanctions. more importantly you can see they'll be able to enter into the global economy. as we all know iran is a state sponsored of terrorism. but more importantly is one of the -- basically the god father and patron of hezbollah, which hasn't raised -- we haven't

raised today. is actually supplying the foreign fighters for the assad regime in syria. it's so complex and con va-- once you lift the punitive measures of the sanctions, it will be very very hard to backtrack and reimpose them. >> let's drill down professor, a little bit more if we can please. assuming the sanctions were to be lifted, and as you stated iran is a sponsor of terrorism throughout the middle east. whether syria somalia or yemen what would be the mechanics what would we see if you were involved in the international banking community with respect to how the lifting of the sanctions may facile it organized crimes with terrorist activities, and how might the iranian regime be involved in specifically to facilitate that.

>> so more importantly we lift first the financial sections which means iran would be table to bank globally which is perhaps the most painful. more importantly f we look from a physical trade piece their ability to think about importing or exporting components that are, perhaps could be used for other nuclear aspirations. in terms of a bank itself, we all, and when i was working at goldman sachs, did a tone of compliance. and more are instituting other global financial actor who is are going to see this and seize the opportunity to increase their physical ability to access iran. once iran actually also lines them with more money they'll be able to use the money. particularly since there's not a difference. and we spent a lot of time taking a look at how the regions in latin america could

destabilize other parts o f the world with the nefarious agenda. >> thank you very much. i appreciate everybody being here and let's stay on offense. appreciate it. yield back my time. >> gentleman yields back. now recognize the gentleman from texas, mr. green for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank the witnesses for appearing as well. mr. chairman, i'm very much concerned about the notion that we should follow the money but i'm also concerned about following the counterfeit money. what's called super notes. these -- this currency is so finely tuned that sometimes it's very difficult to be detected but for some sort of special technology. as you know, the dolla is the reserve currency of most of the world. and there is a war for supremesy. and my concern or maybe i shouldn't be and i'll let you tell me is whether or not these

super notes flowing in and out of our country and into other countries can pose some sort of threat to security and this country in the long run. i do understand we retooled our currency, but i'm still concerned about nationals nationals, nationals, larger than terrorist organizations. countries if you will, that can play a role in devaluing in our currency. does anyone care do respond? >> having overseen the multiyear initiative for the u.s. government against north korea's illicit u.s. networks including super note, i guess i can comment. it is a very -- it's been a costly endeavor for the u.s. we had to redesign them twice as a result of the national level

count fitting of our currency. i do not know that they have succeeded as count fitting the latest it ration of the $50 and $100 bill. so, you know, congressman i definitely appreciate your interest in this and concern. it is a concerning issue. it's cost us hundreds of millions of dlafrollars to redesign the currency over the years. and north korea did spur on several huge bank runs overseas. in taiwan, i think we had over $500 million in bank runs in a period of a couple weeks back in 2003 or 2004. so the amount of money that the regime in north korea has garnered from super note circulation is probably not as high as some people think. but the damage they have done is considerable. and the damage they could do and if they could counterfeit the security features on the new notes. it would be pretty incredible technologically. but they've been pretty good up to now.

they've managed to do it four times, i believe with notes. and we know that they're essentially printing their notes and our notes that they're taking, the version of our notes on the printing presses. so you know north korea is using the absolute best capabilities here. so i think the treasury is on top of it. the bigger issue is why did north korea prosecute it when we investigated it. the state department played a very big role supporting the department of justice. the fbi had incredible investigation into the super note activity. including ties to the ira and japanese terrorist groups in the 19 70s and it was just wild stuff, featured in vanity fair and wall street journal articles and other things. and president bush, who i had the honor to serve, decided it was too controversial and we couldn't press charges against the kim regime. at the same time we were negotiating with them. i was negotiating with them and i was involved in trying to press charges against them at

the same time. i didn't understand the reason not to do that. the north koreans know damn well what we were doing. and somebody needs to be held accountable, but they didn't do it. in theory somebody could make a case. statue of limitations -- >> mr. asher, if i may, i appreciate your answer. i do want to interrupt for this reason. i have one other question for you. this one relates to knockoffs. i want to move to a more pedestrian level, if i may. knock knockoffs. we see a lot of it on the streets. the question is, to what extent are the knockoffs related to either networks of criminal activity, not just us individual but networks and also the possibility of being late to terrorism. >> yeah, the largest export from north korea, believe it or not

is counterfeit cigarettes, coming out of north korea government controlled, criminally run factories. they're making maybe as much as 700 to a billion dollars a year in revenue on these. we have them tracked all over the united states. frequently they appear in the press as coming out of china. they're coming through china because north korea doesn't export to the united states. is it benefits the regime? absolutely. are they tied into organized crime? 100% certainly. and we've proved it in court repeatedly. so you should be concerned. >> thank you for the time. i yield back. >> chair recognizes -- from pennsylvania for fife minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. you point out in your testimony iran whose banks are largely barred from the financial systemfrom

aspects through venezuela, ecuador which act as proxies by moving iranian money as if it originated in their own unsanctioned financial systems. can you explain how iran was able to use the sajss to evade international regimes and what the u.s. has tried to do, clearly unsuccessfully to prevent this? >> thank you sir. there are two specific cases that i can go into some detail. one was set up as the venezuelan bank, but all of the directors were iranian. and it was eventually when i and some others dug up documents showing we were all iranian citizens and it was operating as a subsidiary, in fact as a subsidiary as the iranian bank, not as the government had claimed. the treasury market sanctioned them, and they are now

functioning, but at a much smaller level than they were before. but they still have the iranian influence. the other case is the case of -- bank in ecuador, where we were able to get the records to investigate journalists in the region. and i was able to supplement with other stuff. got the records between president rafael and ahmadinejad in february of 2012. and the president eventually acknowledged these documents were legitimate. so we don't have the debate over whether this was real or not. the president says oh i have a bank for you. it was a national bank virtually nonfunctional but existed as a bank. after they reached that agreement, the president sent the president of the central bank of ecuador with the delegation to iran to negotiate which bank with whom they would have correspondent

relationships, on their way there, they stopped in russia first stop and opened an account in one of the few russian banks that maintains banking relationships with iran. therefore, you could have interbank transfers without registering through the system. and then they go down and negotiate with iranian banks. there's communications from the people saying on the delegation saying these are all sanctioned banks. is it okay? and the ecuadorian government says yes, go ahead. >> are there policies we could implement to better prevent this from happening. >> absolutely. i think one of the thinks you're seeing now in central america where you have literally billions of unexplained dollars that have regular relationships with the united states, there would be multiple things, which dr. asher led on the lebanese bank type thing. the chairman's first question was in latin america, what would the joint task force be good? those guys are looking at pocket literature and different things that did very well at what they did. what we're looking at now is

state run bank systems, where we have multiple banks in central america growing exponentially with no rational explanation. we have banks in panama doing exactly the same thing. >> would any measures we take, though be moot by a lifting of sanctions with respect to iran's banks? >> i think that it could -- i think it would make it much more difficult. once the sanction is -- as selena said, once the sanctions are lifted, the snap back is not going to be very rapid or nearly as forceful. >> let me bring the professor in there, because in your testimony, one of the measures that you identified to counter these networks were to maintain a vib vigorous sanction regime against state sponsors, transnational criminal organizations and narcotic kingpins and designated nationals. i've contended that the

sanctions regime in place with iran today is justified completely on the fact that they've been exploiting terror for decades. responsible for hundreds of americans deaths since 1980. you go back to the rescue attempt. and then go through the list of what they have been doing, including the killing of hundreds of our soldiers in iraq. that alone justifies a sanctions regime with regard to the nuclear program they have. i guess my question, dr. asher, professor, if you could address whether you think if we lift these sanctions on iran will we see more terror financing coming from iran? >> it's one of the things that's actually limited them from supporting hezbollah. >> current sanctions have. >> right, the current sanctions have. if you think about it, if that's the measure, and they were going to alleviate a lot of the economic stress that the

country, that is a state sponsor, is actually -- it's a question of we have been able to make their pockets smaller. right? as a global sanctions regime. and the question is, what are they going to use with all the income they're going to have once that reenter the global marketplace, whether it's financial or the import and export trade. and more an more countries are interested in doing business with iran. and unfortunately, that's the downside of globalization, which i also wrote about in my testimony. as we benefitted tremendously from a productive and interconnected world. unfortunately, the terrorists and the criminals are taking the the same advantages. >> i think my time is expired, mr. chairman. thank you all for your testimony on working this field. >> we recognize the gentleman from arkansas, mr. hill for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank the panel for participating. dr. asher, reflect for me when we put pressure on particularly developed countries and through the financial process, through the patriot act. we squeeze legitimate users and

illegitimate users out of the market, whether it's the american banking system or the the u.k. banking system. and it's been a big important tool that we've had diplomatically. what can we do in that arena? could you expand on that for a minute? >> i think that's a really interesting question. we haven't really utilized outside of the world of straight up drug trafficking the process of forfeiture that effectively. it's something i've advocated against is the use of rico

which has huge nationalists because terrorism is a specified lawful act. under the law. so if you engage in more than two suas allowed under ric, you are engaged in a criminal conspiracy that can be prosecuted. and the thing about rico and the way it relates to asset forfeitures, you can relate to anyone. you can say i'm an al qaeda member. a lot of people want to brag about it you're charged. it's a pretty interesting tool. you can go half their mind. if we find there's a foundation in a far flung land, in let's say, even a country that doesn't have an imlet with us or doesn't on nor it,honor it, lebanon, for example. we found a bank called bank lebano france. they put their money in that. that was apparently hezbollah's money. under the law, we have a section

called 981k of title 18 that allows substitute assets to be confiscated, where the u.s. government can actually reach the assets. so even though we didn't have an inlat with lebanon, and it would be better if we did, we were able to freeze the money and forfeit ultimately $102 million of hezbollah's money without going to lebanon. if we have imlats that we should use more strategically, it will be exponentially more effective. but even where we don't have it we have legal tools that can be useful. the the key is, we've got to deprive financial assets for the adversaries' pockets. >> thank you. mr. barrett, is there a formalized model you can see in this charitable arena, where you have seen it maybe a best practice where through either forced disclosure or legitimate

charities to warn potential donors that they actually have a record of bad acting through the follow of the the 990 report with the irs. if it's a u.s. charity or is there a way to formalize a receipt of remittances in the foreign country like somalia, that might work that would be a way to better monitor those flows? do you have further opinion on that? >> well, i think you're right. i think public awareness is enormously important. and indeed the public donating to charity has a responsibility to also know how the charities are going to spend that money. and there are regulations, which developed over the years. best prakctices as you say, in this country and the the united kingdom as well, which i think required the registration of charities and the auditing of their accounts with much more scrutiny than there has been in

the past. and i think it's having a real effect. many charities are found funding terrorism in jurisdictions where the law is applied properly and fully. and on remittances, too, i think there's a mistake often made that how well it is somehow prepared to turn a blind eye to transactions, which banks might otherwise stop. but in fact, they have to know the customers even more than banks, because of course it is based entirely on trust, rather than on field and commercial basis. >> i yield back, mr. chairman. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky mr. barr, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman for calling this important hearing and exploring and learning more about the dangerous nexus between terrorism and criminal organizations. and i'm particularly interested in whether or not there is substantial evidence of u.s. based criminal organizations

that have partnered with islamic terrorist organizations and what is the extent of the nexus between -- we've heard about international drug cartels involvements but to what extent are american based u.s. based criminal organizations affiliated with islamic terrorist organizations like hezbollah, like isil, for anyone? >> i think there are times when you see u.s. based criminal organizations overlapping the drug trade with hezbollah activities. i'm not aware of any systemic or systemic or larger scale

organizations. i think that's the line most people won't cross because the price would be very high for them. i think criminal organizations are largely very rational actors. and the price they would pay would be that high and they don't need those groups to do what they want to do particularly in drug trafficking. i'm not aware of that on any significant scale. >> i'll just say briefly that the drug cartel is not balsed in the the united states. it derives a lot of income from the united states. it's basically pablo escavar's empire living on. importing massive amounts of cocaine into the united states. so they're learning a lot of income here. in boast kats there's definitely a partnership going on with lebanese hezbollah. especially the darkest side of hezbollah. in my work personally i can attest to that in front of you. that we have seen it. and you know hopefully some day it's going to get prosecuted in

criminal court. this con fluns between these major cartels and criminal states, which doug has done a great job of pointing out. like venezuela and organizations like hezbollah is out of control. >> let me turn to isil for just a minute. we know from your testimony and from previous hearings that the sources of isil funds are predominantly in oil and the looting of the banks from mosul and kidnappings and ransom and the the like. to what extent does the islamic state have access and participate in the international financial system banking, and what -- and what could american policymakers do to disrupt the united states access to financial institutions? >> yeah, i think that's really an excellent question and one

puzzling many experts who look at isil, but the fact of the matter i think is most of the money is self generating economy, and that the money circulates within the terrorists occupied by isil. in so far as the money coming from the outside, it does seem to come into isil controlled territory in cash, rather than anything else. but i think increasingly we will see the the transfer of money through the internet, which is becoming more common elsewhere. and so people who want to make donations will be able to send it to a bank, probably in turkey or parts of syria and iraq, which are not controlled by isil, but it will be cashed in then and brought over the border. so there will be some sort of interaction with the international -- >> so section 311 there becomes -- is section 311 the best tool available to the united states to disrupt those

banking activities? >> the best is to gather intelligence on how that's happening and then deal with the individual cases as they come up. i think a blanket approach can be very difficult when you look at the sort of variety that may be available. and the fact that predominantly the cash will come into the territory in physical form, rather than electronic form. >> well, my time is about ready to expire. but if any of you could offer an opinion on what is the single most important policy change that this congress could enact to disrupt terrorist access to criminal organizations. is there any one recommendation that you would highlight? >> i think the bank secrecy act of 1971 needs to be fully revised. i think we need to update it. i think there's way too much money being spent on unsuccessful attempts to try to limit funding, and we're not

focused on the most important things. there's a huge overregulation of this area. i'm one of the guys that pioneered this stuff, but i will the admit it it's not working and that's really why i came before you today. we could do a much better job with less cost to the financial institutions if we focused on the problem actors. there's not that many drug cartels in the world. the financial institutions need to be told who is in the cartel, what they're doing. they need to be give an catch list organization like we do with transportation companies. why don't we tell the banks they're banking with terrorists? >> thank you, i yield back. >> chair now recognizes the gentleman from arizona for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. there's so many things we would like to know in this. when we have five minutes, we try to do it very quickly. can i walk through a scenario? i'm trying to understand flow and also cost. discounts.

drug cartel. sells the elicit products in north america. first, how does it get the cash back across the border? is it converting it to gold? it it carrying suitcases of cash? how are they getting it to central america first? what would your opinion be? and then i'm going to ask if they end up in ecuador, what are they being charged? what is the cost of money laundering? walk me through a couple of these steps? >> thank you. i think on the drug trade, a lot of the money goes back in bulk cash, and a lot of it goes back in wire transfers and bank transfers into central america. the cost is generally 17 to 22%. there are banks in central america where if you deposit over a certain amount of money generally in the neighborhood of 3 million or $4 million and pay the 17% they will provide you

with a history of justification of that money. in other words, they'll create all your tax records and employment records and so that money is now untraceable. as one of the full services that the banks are offering. >> how much of that will spif to the government leaders? let's say i spent 22% to wash my elicit cocaine money that has come back in the country. the government has created a charter to allow me to have access to this bank. what is that president, what is that administration, what is that government taking out of that? >> i think you see right now the vice president of guatemala just resigned. i believe she was involved in a really lucrative scheme, where there was some banks involved and also largely to avoid taxes coming across the border x customs taxes.

and it gets, because as the states have criminalized, it becomes a state operation to run that state. i don't know the exact percentages. i know in some cases the government officials will take up to half of what comes out of there. you look at the the cases that have been prosecuted. like the former president in guatemala, who racked up multihundreds of millions of dollars. you have the former president of el salvador, who was charged with $200 million. you have another former president of el salvador who showed he had made $450 million. >> but do we have investigations going on right now in panama and others in regards to other certain issues? >> there are -- i think that what david asher said is true. you have a lot of really good smart people looking at this and operating in severe resource constraints, and when i talk you have for example the case

of 311 designation, a collapsed a major money laundering operation a couple of months ago. they had three branches operating in panama. and in that branch we had at least $2 billion from the venezuelan oil company and many in russian organized crime kmi china's organized crime et cetera. when you go to talk, they simply don't have the resources to rereach out and do all this stuch. this is great information. we would like to help. we have three people to look at 45 cases. and they lock it drop. >> about three weeks ago i was in panama, sat down with parliamentarian. not from panama, but from one of the countries you have mentioned. ft and he swears that he sat there and watched the check from ultimately iran being deposited. and has tried to speak about it publicly and has made very, very little progress. dr. asher walk me through,

because i'm trying to get my head around how formalized this is. we had a aeroing that talked about in venezuela there was almost a shopping list of your price for if you're washing hundred dollar u.s. currency, you pay this, this, this and this. it's a criminal state. it's a crime being carried out to benefit the leaders of that regime. and they can use it. no surprise there's money in the oil accounts. how do you get money from the united states. congressman was asking about how do you get the money from the u.s.? well, i can't prove it. there's way too many cases where you see the oil companies showing up related to the movement of funds. you ever heard of citgo? who knows what is going on with

these things? when you read the law enforcement cases, things pop up. and there has to be something going on tw the use of formalized transactions and trade with a lot of the states. and it is concerning from my think tank perspective, that we are doing perilously little to try to police it because they are being, according to the privileges of governments, even if they're engaged in criminal activity. >> mr. chairman, thank you for the time. thank you for letting me go over. for many of us, we would love to see the charting to understand the movement between bad actors in governments, bad actors in business, and just plain old bad actors. and see that flowchart. >> i thank the gentleman. without objection, we'll proceed to another round of questions. if any member wishes to be recognized. from north carolina. >> >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the courtesy.

i appreciate the court see of each of you all. when there is a settlement with the bank being complicit in money laundering, what happens to this the proceeds of those settlement funds and could those funds be used for counter terrorism efforts and how could we designate that? who would like to take that? it's an open question. >> well, the u.s. marshals manages all the assets they're seized. there's freezing and then there's the seizure of assets. it's probably been much more poplarized through movies who look at the dea and their raids and going after cartels. the question is then it's divided among the different agencies that were involved in that actual operation. and it's swail a very interesting u.s. model that we're exporting to other partner nations who are looking at asset forfeiture as a very useful tool. there are two things they say in mexico the cartel leaders are worried about.

extradition to a solitary cell without a cell phone into the united states, and then more importantly, the actual expropriation of their funds, that the children will live a less luxurious live than themselves. i think -- and i've advocated that in the seeizure of those funds and the fines for known sanctions regime and laundering money, there should be a portion dedicated to actually helping those who are actually involveded in uncovering and prosecuting these crimes. i think you heard so much about how within the u.s. government there are really fantastic experts doing this but because of the shortage of human resources and unfortunately, too, the fact that many of our best experts are leaving and going to the private sector, we need to work on capacity building within the u.s. government for combatting terrorism and crime and corruption.

>> agree, resources are critical. we're talking hundreds and millions of dollars. and the allocation of those funds, it seems to me in advancing the count terrorism efforts to be very important. >> having contributed probably a few hundred million dollars to the asset forfeiture fund over the years i always wonder what happens to the money. it's a great question. yes, we have several billion dollar pots that are used. but far too little is allowed to be used proktively, for example. now this is a controversial issue on the ill here. and i respect members opinions on this. and this is something we live to regret. i know something like this could happen. but the use of money as a tool to do sting operations as they exist is indispensable. we have to put money on the table to be able to interact with no kidding, transnational organizeded crime groups.

with credibility. undercover operations are critical. the asset forfeiture funds are critical. there's a tiny amount allowed to be used for any proactive approach, which paralyzes the effectiveness of our law enforcement agents against them. and it's not just the asset forfeiture funds themselves being used for increasing forfeiture and increased sufficient there, it's how they're being used. i think we got to get much more aggressive, like we were in the 1980s and '90s against the columbian cartels, largely because people are shot left, right, and center in the streets of miami. >> thank you. further comment? thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. and mr. hill is recognized. >> thanks, mr. chairman. i want to follow up there's so many members of the house and senate concerneded about the iranian negotiations under way between the administration and iran. and when we had our last hearing, so many of us were, i

think shocked at the magnitude of money that would flow back to iran, were the proposed treaty to be successful. $50 billion signing bonus and then the freeing up of cash in the accounts that had been frozen, and then of course the flow as was noted by the professor of future trade capability. you know in your role of interdicting terror financing and stopping the expansion of terrorism, how would you rank that hundred plus, $120 billion that may flow to iran if this treaty proceeds? i mean, if one is of low importance to our national security and the ability to stop the expansion of terror finance, and ten is critical, very important how would each of you rank the the freeing up of that $120 billion? we'll start with dr. asher and

let each of you rank -- give me a number. >> i'll give you a rank. i don't think it's ten. it may be five. it may be three. but the big thing is iran's revolutionary regime and the externalization of the regime that revolutioning, which is the top priority of a policy that is a problem. when we went to the north korea six-party talks, we should have been focused on not just exporting in syria but we also should have been focused on the fact the north korea regime was not negotiating. the whole orientation was against our existence. that's the problem with the iranians. maybe there's something going on where they're going to change that. i hope so. that's the problem that concerns me. is they're opposed to us and it's the national ideology as a state. >> i think iran like all states operates in its best interest. it will identify the best

interests in different ways according to the context of the international community around it. sure, iran if it had more money, might fund actors that the united states and the allies would not like to see better funded and at the moment, of course iran is providing a huge amount of many unto syria to prop up the assad regime. it's paying for various militia in iraq, which on the other hand are probably the most effective forces against isil. and i think the main way of making sure that money will not be used in ways that we would like is to try to bring iran much more into the international community so they identify their interest alongside everybody else's rather than being the sort of outlieer who is trying to sort of find advantage. and that of course comes back to the fundamental problems in the middle east, sectarianism, the

confrontation and many other complex questions. >> well i agree with david asher. one of the late prosecutors in argentina was the one who pointed out to me when we were talking about iran and lath tin america. he said have you read the iranian constitution, and i said frankly no. he said read the preamble to the constitution the official translation. and it is state policy as the armed guard of spreading jihad around the world. that's written into their constitution. so i agree with david there is a fundamental nature of the iranian regime is something that allowing fungible money into their system will almost inevitably point toward much more aggressive action outside including terrorism. because that is their core underlying belief, which they acknowledge and write about extensively. >> i think it's a great concern

here in the united states. we focus primarily on the nuclear deal, when at the same time a lot of our arab allies are much more focused on iranian expansionism. and more importantly, revival of a persian empire. you've seen now the influence of iran in four major capitals. they call it the shia precedent and some of our arab gulf state allies are worried about becoming a shia circle. we have basically control or influence in baghdad in lebanon and syria and sadly what you're seeing devolve in yemen it's not even a question of af state sponsor of terrorism it's a question about iranian -- which is so complex because of the religious angle and historical rivalries, we're not covering it in the press because we're focused on the nuclear deal, we're not looking at the

political aspirations of iran. >> the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank you for your testimony. i have been listening very attentively in my office to your testimony. and let me just ask first a few questions because my focus has been on this committee, what we can do in congress to make sure not allowing this internet and others to facilitate anti-money laundering, et cetera. mr. asher i'll ask you the first question. i think in your testimony you mentioned that congress should amend the bank secrecy act, data sharing among banks. now, the issue that we had to vote, there's a general concern among americans about personal

information being widely available to range of institutions with little knowledge how that information is being used. so i was wondering if you could elaborate on this conflict and how congress should proceed with improving the bank secrecy act while also preserving the individuals human rights to private debate that we have going on in congress right now. >> that's a great question and i appreciate you asking it. look, bank secrecy the bank secrecy act was not passed to protect bank secrets, it's designed to stop anti-money laundering, they changed the name because of concerns. i'm concerned as a private american citizen about information about personal information beingdy have you evered. but the cat is out of the bag. the amount of datea about us is almost ridiculous.

it's allowed under the patriot act, you can share banks -- a or b, banks can share e-mail and money laundering data with each other but they can't pull it. if you can do visa or mastercard process, you would see massive schemes that could be stopped by banks at a relatively low cost. you would see this guy just opened an account at this bank at whatever city and you know, they are smurfing the system. no one can see that. sharing the data would not only reduce costs but improve effectiveness. they would still be obliged to not share the data with anyone outside of official channels. they couldn't provide it to -- they would be sharing with each other. they are allowed to do that. it's not going to get dif ulged

morning it's already difvulged. a consortium could be in a position to receive watch list data from the u.s. government. we need to consider providing that. we provide it to our airlines and shipping lines. if we think there's a ship containing a container full of let's say some weapons coming to the united states, we're going to tell them there's a container, you have to inspect it. do we tell the banks they are doing business with drug traffickers or hezbollah? no, only through public dif ulgs. we don't need to tell the terrorists we're looking at them. >> you know that debate is going on. >> i do. i am concerned about i don't think -- if this system is done right it won't lead to more divulsion of private

information. >> i would like to have this debate more and more but again i'm trying to figure out what to do as a committee. let me jump to mr. barrett. you started in your testimony that corruption along with other forms of poor governance, particularly in the delivery of justice is the most significant driver of terrorism in the world today. i was asking want to know maybe and you can elaborate on what role the financial services committee with our oversight authority of international monetary organizations, what role can we play in better ensuring governance in nation struggling with terrorist organizations. >> well i think -- go ahead. >> well, i think that what you're doing is absolutely right. i think that as corruption, corrupt officials and criminalalty and so on, is such a driver of terrorism in these areas where essentially the

people are completely dissatisfied that the more you can sanction those individuals as government leaders and others who are involved in the corrupt practices and in the financial skull dugry that goes on in the general criminal world and the less dissatisfied people will be. if they see justice being served at least in another jurisdiction, even if not in their own, that will be very encouraging to them. i think it has an outcome and effect on the terrorism. >> i would like to thank the witnesses for their testimony and their time here today and for the significant expertise that you've shared with the task force. we all appreciate that. without objection all members have five legislative days in which to submit additional written requests to the chair which will be forwarded to the witnesses. i ask our witnesses to please respond as promptly as you're able. without objection this hearing

is adjourned. starting shortly remarks by garrison keillor speaking in just a few minutes, live coverage here on c-span3. we'll take a look at capitol hill and what's on the agenda in the u.s. senate. >> mr. rogers can you explain what is going on in the senate and what's going to happen today and perhaps over the weekend as well? >> sure the senate is in a race against time but trying to figure out a few different matters. the first is a schedule is a

trade legislation that is not time sensitive but senate republican leadership wants to pass before the memorial day recess. after that there's going to be the end of the month the nsa's collection of telephone metadata will end by midnight may 31st and the administration admitted there could be lapses if the senate doesn't pass a house passed bill by the end of today. and then of course there's also the third item highway trust fund authorization that the house has passed a temporary two-month bill there as well. they have a lot on their plate and the senators can already -- they are trying to get home for the parades and everything else this weekend. >> alex rogers what kind of negotiation are going on right

now to get these things passed? >> well, what has happened so far is the senate has pushed forward this trade bill and got an advance only in the last minute maneuvering on the chamber floor yesterday, you had a band of senators who really want to get the export import bank passed. that also has a time sensitive delay at the end of next month. and they got mcconnell got the senators on board and that bill was advanced and so now they are trying to push through today a bunch of amendments and maybe final passage on this trade promotion authority, which would pave the way by limiting congressional debates, and congress will not be able to

tinker too much with the major trade deals that come down the line. but after that, it's going to be a big debate on the nsa's bulk collection of telephone metadata. and there are two different things that are going to go through or first a vote on the house usa freedom act, which passed overwhelmingly in the house. and there's going to be a vote on that and we're not exactly sure if that has 60 votes yet. it seems like they could be nearing 60 but right now it doesn't seem like they have enough votes. but if that fails and they are going to go to a clean two-month extension which the gop leadership really wants to try to increase leverage later to come back and have a compromise at the house. the problem is the house has already gone, house has already left. so they are going to have to be called back in session, there's

going to have to be a clean reauthorization. so what's going to happen after trade is these two votes on the nsa bulk collection authority, and right now the question is up in the air if either one of them can pass. >> and this is all happening today and potentially saturday as well correct? >> yeah although senator mccain told me yesterday, i know when friday rolls on there's a new spirit of reconciliation and compromise and said the day of the week determines the degree of bipartisanship. so they are hoping that the senators will be able to be able to consent and move forward on all of these bills in quick order. but as you saw with senator rand paul earlier this week, some senators may be willing to take up floor time and talk about these issues. that wasn't an actual filibuster because it didn't delay the schedule.

but maybe some of these senators will actually do that when push comes to shove and we may be here for the weekend. >> alex rogers final question what's the role of the export import bank in some of these negotiations? >> sure that was a late breaking twist to all of this. yesterday on the senate floor you had washington senator maria kantwell and lindsey graham in a tight circle formed around mitch mcconnell. and then a range of other senators around them. it was quite a sight to see. what they've been pushing for is to try to get assurances from the leadership there's going to be a vote in june on the export import bank which charter expires at the end of the month.

it helps insure loan guarantees for american companies who are exporting goods abroad. those three senators i mentioned all have a major company and in their state and they want to be able to see that company's success and continue into the future and boeing thinks the export import bank is something that needs to be reauthorize. the problem is there are house conservatives and house gop leadership who would not mind at all to see this charter expire. so there's this debate whether or not there's going to be even a vote to let the charter be reauthorized and so what happened was after mcconnell gave his insurance to these three senators they all started voting one by one to advance debate on trade. boom boom boom, you have six

senators in a row all vote aye and the trick bill announced and maybe we'll see this trade promotion authority pass today or maybe into the weekend. the export import bank was a key factor in getting these senators on board and moving this major trade legislation going forward. >> alex rogers, national journal, thanks for the update. >> and at the national press club today story teller garrison keiller, host of "a prairie home companion." >> celebrating the 41st anniversary with a live outdoor broadcast in st. paul at mcallister college. that was the location of the first broadcast of a prairie home companion on july 6th 1974. keiller may have a thought or two about that subject. he's going to talk with us about 15 things that need to happen

tomorrow. ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm national press club welcome to garrison keiller. [ applause ] >> thank you very much, you're much too kind. don't make that mistake again. you'll be held to account for it. it's an honor to be here with you and certainly a great honor i have gone to the lengths of writing out a speech, which i never ever do. reminds me too much of being in college. 15 things that need to change right away is the revised title of my speech. i came up with this because i was thinking about another speech i gave which also was a great honor i was invited to give the back laure yet address

at princeton university i was up in princeton earlier this week and came back to me much too clearly. i wrote this speech. i thought i should say something inspiring to these young graduates and something about, you know live is adversity and you know, it's in struggle that we come to understand ourselves and i thought no, i should make it funny. i worked on that. i wrote a story about the first outhouse tipping that i experienced in minnesota, which i was very much involved in as a victim. but you can change these things around you know and then i wasn't sure that princeton graduates would know what an outhouse was. i revised that. i wound up in princeton with this speech in my pocket and it

was an academic procession through the campus, through these silent, you know awe-struck crowds and all of these people with gorgeous academic robes and multicolored hoods and sashs and so on from their having gotten the ph.d. at oxford or cambridge or dubai or the university of phoenix, or wherever. there i was in this plain black robe which seemed to say, vocational school. so i made my way into the great gothic chapel there. and i've got this introduction, even more full some than john's which sounded so much like a eulogy. and then i made my way up to the pulpit. you have to cross over the -- and climb this steep stairway

two-part stair way up to the pulpit which is up against a wall, a stone call. the applause lasted about halfway up. and so the first thing that the audience heard from me was heavy breathing. and i launched into this speech, which was funny. i mean, it was conceptionally funny and people are stud yus and their eyes were closed, some of them and there was a little bit of laugher in the corner, but not much. and it dawned on me about three minutes into this 20-minute speech that my voice was bouncing around in all of this gothic grandeur and i could hear things i had said 15 or 20 seconds before. so that the people who are

sitting out in front of me could not hear a single word -- they could hear a few words but not whole sentences. and i cut about ten minutes out of the speech by eliminating pages four and five. and shot to the end. there was grateful applause and i came down and through the crowd and into a reception. and people walked up to me and said good job. nothing specific. good job you know as you would say to a child who had had a bowel movement. you know not that i disagree with that fourth point that you made, which i hadn't made, and this dawned on me i thought at this reception and in the long

painful ride back home to minnesota, that as i looked back on my career in broadcasting nobody had ever complimented me on a specific thing. nobody had ever quoted back to me some brilliant thing i had ever said. it was always general. we like your show. it really relaxes our children we listen to it late at night. and it occurred to me that perhaps i had spent 40 years in radio as a sort of comforting baritone presence and that nobody heard anything in particular that i had said. i'm willing to accept that. i'm a christian, we want to have of service. but today i want to give a speech that's a little more

specific so that you'll find things to disagree about. it's inspired by the feeling that i had when president obama announced back in december that the administration is going to pursue an opening to cuba. this was thrilling to me it was like spring coming to minnesota in mid-june. it was like when the plane finally begins to move, you've been sitting on the tarmac for hours, perhaps days lost track, you've heard one explanation after other, weather related, air traffic control, a flashing light in the cockpit one pilot is depressed, i don't know what. but then finally you begin to

move and you feel incredulity, that's how i felt when the president announced and things started to move forward. somebody in washington was recognizing reality. and this to the rest of us is just astonishing. i was a college kid when this blockade of cuba went into effect. i was a poet writing poem in all lower case letters. and now i am on social security. now people address me as sir, people say would you like to use the stairs or would you like to take the elevator? all of this time has gone by and to see the government move on this, is astonishing something happened. something was done and now you hear about a ferry service

between miami and key west and ha va vanna. the minnesota or kes stra has gone on tour to cuba. they came back ecstatic, they are mu igssiciansmusicians never get ecstatic. it is utterly astonishing. the president recognizing reality. i felt the same way when he announced he was going to take executive action to protect 5 million undocumented workers from deportation. nobody was ever talking about about deporting these people because they work. we need them they are part of our economy. perhaps 11 million undocumented workers, nobody was talking about shipping them out. the work, the paperwork, astonishing to think of what it would take. and nobody wants to send them away. why not recognize them and give them some stability in our

country so that people cannot pay them 85 cents an hour and have them work 85-hour weeks. why not? this was astonishing. somebody in washington recognizing reality. and so my speech today. 15 numbered -- 15 numbered things that need to happen tomorrow. washington has such a reputation for inaction and blockade and dysfunction that some small symbolic thing i think would be a good first move and i think it's time to finally name the streets downtown that only have initial letters. i just -- everybody else nameses

their streets and why not. i think they should be named for floss philosophers to give the city some tone some class. only suggestions emerson frankly, hagel, henry james kirkeguard for k street. martin luther mac ya velly of course and so on. see how quickly this speech moves along here. number two, i think we need to relax with the flag pins. i'm not looking at anybody right now. it just seems to me it's become a requirement for anybody running for public office in america to put a little flag pin on their lapel it's become required that the president end every speech with god bless america, so people won't

question whether or not he loves his country. i think it's a bad way to go. this is a free country. it really is. it's trying to be. and parts of it certainly are. and there should not be any requirement that we wear a badge or symbol in this country. this is not germany in the 1930s when you were required to wear an arm band and it had -- the swastika had to be the right size and you had to pronounce it correctly and right arm had to be at the correct angle. let's just not go too far. i looked at john mccain's website and there are pictures of him there and he has no flag pin in his lapel. if he doesn't wear one, then neither do you. i think we should put out a cease and desist order on the announcements still heard in airports in this country to

notify authorities if a perpendicular or persons unknown to you come up and ask you to carry something aboard the aircraft. nobody has ever done this. nobody. nobody. nobody ever will do this. this is fiction. and it's not -- it's not harmful to anybody to have fiction but it gives young people the sense that authorities are not in touch with reality. and there's enough evidence of that already without adding -- without adding to that. i also think that we can continue the movement in this country to remove some of those fort fictions and barriers and flower pots and so forth that were put up in public places to defend against somebody driving a truckloaded with explosives. they don't really have a good

purpose. they are more symbolic than anything else. symbolic security is dangerous. and engineers have told us that in the case of most of these barriers, if a truckloaded with explosives pulled up alongside and detonated these barriers would be splintered and they would become flying missiles. and we don't need anymore of that. number four, i think we should stop making dimes nickels and pennies. i just think it's time. i see young people dropping small change in parking lots. i can't speak for you, but i no longer bend over to pick up a dime. i just -- i don't go there. the fundraiser for polio used to be called the march of dimes but dimes don't march anymore. they don't. they are not worth enough. we used to say a penny for your

thoughts, we don't see that anymore because it would be insulting. i think if we leave the current supply of small change in circulation it will gradually dissipate and disappear. and these coins will in time become more valuable. let's just try that. number five, we need to change the seating arrangement in the house and the senate. and mix democrats and republicans in the chamber so that members don't have to reach across the aisle. they can turn to the person next to them and hold out their hand if they wish. school teachers know that when cliques or gangs form in a public school, you separate them. you don't let them all sit together. and we need to do this in -- there's no more red or one side

and blue on the other. go for a checkerboard effect here. and seat them by seniority, with the old ones way in the back and young ones down front just so they -- so they get the idea. number six, it makes no sense that people who work hard cannot support themselves let alone supporting a family. this is just part of the social compact in our country. but if you work hard and keep your nose clean you're going to be okay. but you cannot do this on the minimum wage as it exists right now unless your apartment is the back seat of your car and your car is up on blocks and you -- and you live on pet food. it just cannot be done. los angeles did something about that this week and the rest of us should do something about it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. the way to do is is to do it.

number seven here's an item for which there will be no applause in this room not that there was any before. radio and television frequencies are a public resource just like public grazing lands out in wyoming. and they never should have been so -- they should have been leased. maybe it's too late but when a frequency is sold one party to another, there ought to be a flip tax of 50% of appreciated value that goes into the public coffer coffers. radio and tv spectrums are public property. and they should be required radio and tv stations to provide commercial time without charge to political candidates. and it's time to bring back the fairness doctrine which

required stations to present a range of opinion on controversial issues. it didn't inhibit anybody the fairness doctrine. it just meant that when top 40 stations applied for renewal of license, they had to file reports from the fftc, that at 4:00 a.m. they played something from the league of women voters. it was a ritual a meaningly ritual. but it symbolized the fact that the station, the frequency is public property and that they had public responsibility. number eight, our u.s. 7th fleet has been sent to support japan in defense of the sen kak cue islands, also claimed by china. the senkaku islands that are

unpopulated and makes all of this rather meaningless. we should not expect men or women to die defending rock outcroppings in the middle of large bodies of water. let the nation conservancy go out there and defend that. let green peace send people in boats. but not our 7th fleet. number nine the drought in california is simply meant to show people that you cannot have a nice green lawn in on a desert. it doesn't work. in minnesota we don't have giant space heaters in our back yards to make it possible for us to sit in the back yards in february and barbecue. we don't expect that. so -- people in southern california have to learn how to love gravel. that's all. and they have to think twice

about what they are growing for export. there are major exporters of almonds and alfalfa and after kad doughs those are just the ones that begin with a, there are more. they are exporting their precious water in the form of produce. and so the rest of us may need to accept that for certain periods of the year, we will need to eat frozen strawberries and not fresh strawberries that shouldn't be so hard. thanks to alaska and texas and north dakota, our country is close to being energy independent and for this reason we need to take a deep breath and back away from the middle east. these tribes of the middle east the european kol niesers around

the time of world war i packed into nation states are not happy with each other. they need to sort that out themselves. there's not much we can do to assist that. what we have spent in iraq and afghanistan, so far does not appear to have brought progress. and it could have gone a long way towards repairing our crumbling infrastructure in this country. you can call this isolationism -- [ applause ] >> you can call it ice tea whatever, but the president's policy of don't do stupid stuff or cause no harm, is a sensible idea. number 11 rational conservation still has a long way to go in this country and we need to practice more of it. in minnesota we send electricity that is generated by coal. we send it to north dakota to

run their oil pumps which create tons of natural gas, which they simply flare off as a byproduct instead of using it to generate their own electricity. wrong, wrong wrong. the era of coal fired power plants is over. so why not bring this gently to an end? it's time to think again about nuclear power which was cheap and efficient. there were accidents, yes, three mile island, chernobyl, japan we can learn from these things. hollywood made very scary movies about meltdowns. but they also made scary movies about flash eating zombies. and we don't lockup ugly people who talk slow. number 12 music and theater are

businesses as much as football or casino gambling and we should use tax increment financing and zones to include the arts which would bring cities the inner cities back to life and bring some soul back to the people who live in them. >> number 13 the country is moving rapidly in the direction of accepting gay people as people as people period. and the government needs to come along with that. sexual preference is a characteristic. it isn't the key to somebody's identity. people are more complicated than that. i have a friend who came out as gay 20-some years ago and it was very dramatic and he carried the banner of gay liberation and fought for the right of gay

people to adopt children and then gradually he settled into 15 years of a close loving relationship with another man. and having won the right to adopt, he was then free to decide that he didn't want to that he was happy being an uncle and did not want to have the burden of children. number 14, how am i doing on time? am i okay? do you want me to cut this short or expand my -- do you want me to read from the appendix, the footnotes? [ applause ] >> number 14, let's give the word diversity a rest. just a year's moratorium put it aside. we are dieverse, we're one of the most diverse nations on god's green earth and it's one of the shining virtues of this earth.

but the word diverseity has been adopted by a bunch of bean counters and social engineers, all amateurs. the league of american orchestra orchestras for example, set diversity as a goal and i'm quoting now, the ininclusion and involvement of a board representation of our community reflect its true makeup including race ethnicity and cultural background and gender and sexual or yenation and disabilities education and religion. in other words it's not enough to play mozart beautifully, you have to make sure that your audience includes the right proportion of elderly disabled gay asian men who earn less than $30,000 a year. but minority persons are not trophies. they are people they have their own tastes and own predelekss

and what makes moz dz art worth listening to is what happens in people's arts of the subsidized concert tickets, yes, more school concerts yes, yes, yes. counting the number of hispanics at the philharmonic concert i don't think so. number 15, john i'm coming towards an end. there are some big changes we cannot make yet. simplifying the tax code would put too many accountants out of work and it would be so hard to retrain those people. fixing the health care system as a practical nonidealogical matter, it can't be done until younger people get older and people my age die off, which poor health care will hasten the process. same with climate change and

environmental disaster we have to come closer to the cliff before we can get anything done here. electing a woman president might be nice but she won't take office until 2017. we can, however, put the face of a woman on the $20 bill. and that's my last suggestion. [ applause ] >> it would be so easy to do. the department of treasury just over the way as you walk by their on the way to the parking lot. yell up to somebody, get rid of andrew jackson! not worth remembering anyway. harriet tubman has been proposed. i would accept that in a minute. i myself would vote for emily dickinson because in this way you cover women, english majors unitarians and possibly we think lesbians. we're not absolutely -- sure we don't have proof of that yet. all of these things 15 things

can be done expeditiously and what a different world this would be if we would take action here. a few weeks ago, the new york times printed a big investigative story on nail salons in new york city where they employ mostly immigrant people mostly asian women many of them don't speak english, probably undocumented. we're not sure. they need to bribe somebody in order to get a job in many of these salons and paid less than the minimum wage. the salon keeps a proportion of the tips that they receive and they are exposed to horrific chemicals, which with long range health consequences. it was a horror that this is happening in manhattan, the most liberal city in america was just astonishing and it changed people's behavior.

the governor of new york two days afterward announced a crackdown, whatever that may mean, on nail salons but it provoked every single woman in brooklyn and the upper west side of manhattan to ask some pointed questions the next time they walk into a nail salon. it was progress and it was done in a matter of days. it was like a throwback to the old days of campaigning journalism, when upton sinclair wrote a big expose of slaughterhouses and brought about the pure food and drug act. let's do it again. that concludes my speech. i thank you all for listening. i'm going to go become to being a comforting voice on the radio and talking about a small town. thank you. [ applause ]

>> thank you so much, i have so many questions about the radio program but since we're talking about current affairs, i want to ask one question before we leave that. we're talking so much about the 2016 race already, hillary clinton, the democratic side and bernie sanders and now maybe o'malley gets in, he's going to announce i guess. then on the republican side we've got more than a dozen or more. how do you see the race and how do you like hearing about it this early before 2016 election? >> we're just waiting for donald trump, that's all. we're waiting for donald trump to come in and peewee herman i hope on the republican side and fill out that bus. democrats are kind of lacking for drama. i just don't think a guy from

vermont is going to do this. so we're -- we're looking at hillary and at the same time trying not to look too hard. i like her -- i like her myself. i sat next to her on a day at the white house correspondents dinner and she -- she talked to me for about five minutes and then she had a big republican ma sum poe on the other side of her and talked to him for an hour and ten minutes. exactly the right thing for a political woman to do. i was proud of her. she made the right choice. she detected that i was a supporter and didn't waste time on me. >> mentioned in introduction the 41st anniversary of your radio program is coming up. why do you think it's been so

successful now in its fifth decade? >> we don't know what success is in radio. the list of ship numbers are fictional that we toss dice. and i had no idea there are 4 million listeners. i doubt that very much. when you subtract from the 4 million the number of incarcerated felons and whose wardens set their radio dial and then a number of people in memory units, i mean, then you know parents of small children who are not good sleepers you know it's not all that many -- not all that many people. you don't think about it. i don't think about it at all. i'm sorry you made me think about it. >> you often write your program from what i understand the day

before. so very quickly. and what where do you get the inspiration for your scripts that make the stories modern but maintain the essence of the show's focusing charm? >> folksy charm? did you use that? well inspiration is fear of public humiliation, it's a powerful motivator. and it starts to build. here we are we're around noon on friday and i have to do a show on saturday, a broadcast and you know, it starts to get on your mind right around this time and even more so this afternoon. and then saturday morning it gets very intense. but the beautiful thing is that i have all of these other people who are much better organized than i and they -- they do the

heavy lifting. cerebellum is my brilliant writer. and what she has done for me over the years is great. we miss natalie dressed but cerebellum is still there. folksy charm. come on over here i'm going to put my arms around you, son. >> we talk about the dwindling attention span in journalism for stories and so many of us are tweeting things out now as someone known when performing for speaking slowly and deliberatery and focusing as much on artful manner of the story as well as the content of the story what do you think of this era we're in now in speed in small bits of information and art of story telling going to endure? >> spitting out small bits of

information is not a good way to earn a living. it's not a good life. the american people are readers. they are curious people. they want to know things. and so they are waiting the readers, especially the ones who are my age are waiting to hear from you, younger people about the world and how you see it. and don't try to do this in 140 words. it's just not the right way. i went to a speech on wednesday robert caro, the great biographer gave a talk on the research he had done on lyndon johnsonance johnson's experience on the assassination and the research that he did. here was a journalist talking about his research and he held

an enormous audience spellbound for about 45 minutes. no we want to know. we want to know these things. don't hold back. anything that is crucial, that is important in this country somebody will write a book about it and why shouldn't you be the one? >> this questioner notes in your book "home grown democrat" you ended by inviting reader who's spot you in a cafe to approach and say hello. how many did that? >> well, usually they said, like your show, good job. you know our kids grew up on your show. they were -- they were restless and insomniacs and we found your monologues on long playing cds

and put them next to their beds that everything changed. that's what they say actually. >> few people want to know what you think of that guy douglas mark hughes, no relation, who flew the gyrocopter on the lawn to protest money in politics. >> protest money in politics? where has he been for last 150 years. goodness, it's a little late for that. is that really the reason that he gave? i think he just was one more guy wanting to play with toys. no, i took it to mean that they should demilitarize pennsylvania avenue and put it back in its original shape. i think heavy traffic would have discouraged the guy from flying

anything you know taxis getting out of control would have scared the bejesus out of him. i think they ought to take away those barriers and let's drive by the white house and wave as we go. >> did national geographic get it right when they located lake will be gone and there's a diversity question the city of saint cloud has seen a surge of somali immigrants in recent years. have you considered introducing new characters to reflect the changing demographics? >> we have one of the largest populations of somalis in the country there in minnesota. large settlement in south minneapolis, they have their own shopping mall. and you walk in there and you see middle aged women in long

black robes and their daughters in cutoffs and low rider jeans. and jewelry in their belly buttons. the population has not decided i think the somali have not decided if they are here to stay. they've been here for decades and -- but they still believe somehow that there will be a return to their disastrously war torn country. in the meantime they are doing the best they can and we have many listeners among the somalis to our shows. i don't know if i should introduce a somali character and what he or she would do in lake woebe gone i could have a somali woman who would come as an intern to the lutheran

church. that would be interesting. that would be interesting, a conversion and young woman who was in training to be become a pastor. that's a possibility. but we have all of these listeners because they can learn english from listening to a prairie home companion. we don't make references no politics on the show. we don't make obscure pop references at all pop references are obscure now. and we talk slowly. and we pronounce our words. and talk in whole sentences. back to you, john. a questionener wants your opinion on liberalism, do you see contradictions from lbj to today, pro claiming progress but also increasingly presiding over

more economic inequality? >> wow that's a powerful complicated sentence. i'm not sure i could diagram that sentence. yes, of course, there have been changes since then and defeats but we don't have people running successfully for public office against social security and medicare. so that says a lot right there. you can always run against washington. i mean welcome to the club. but they don't get very specific about their plans for entitlement programs. they talk about them sort of vaguely. and so the things that lbj and cohorts and others since have set up seem fairly durable to

me. >> are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of public radio and why? >> i'm very optimistic about it. it has become a an important news medium, especially in rural parts of the west, midwest and it's become very very important as newspapering you know has been up and down and mostly down. public radio stations have come forward to cover local politics in with some care. we started out as sort of an alternative medium. and we now in many parts of the country maybe most, are finding ourselves in the mainstream. public radio does one thing that even its harshest critics and there are many cannot deny and

that is that with very few exceptions very few it gives uninterrupted broadcast time not in little tiny quotes. for that alone -- >> several questions asking about your future. now i read in the introduction the aggressive schedule that you're keeping. obviously no signs of slowing down but i also understand that the prairie home companion show will keep going in your mind long after you keep going? >> it will keep going in my mind, john you say? in my imagination? no, it -- you know it bum bls along from week to week and we

make as long term plans as anybody else does in broadcasting. it also depends on stations and the extent of their interest and their ability to pay our extortionate fees and rates and so forth. and send baked goods you know, to us and other prizes. keys to the city and so forth and honorary degrees. and but no, i'm sort of in a euphoric period. when you reach your early 70s john i hope you experience the same things, feel this sort of bounding optimism. either that or the medications. no, i feel just fine. thank you for your concern. >> one of your greatest stories

on prairie home companion was the prophet which you told during the 1991 persian gulf war. what would a prophet tell us now? >> i'm not in the prophecy business. i've been trying to forget that now for years and years and years. it was one of my ill advised ventures into political commentary and so i've almost erased it from my mind, john, you brought back a little tiny bit. prophet, right? >> no i have -- i have no idea. i've been around and seen a lot of young people in the last -- in the last month actually i went to my old high school in minnesota. and i went to princeton and i went to talk to some students up

in harvard and did a show at mennonite college in indiana goshen. and being around people that age is just so inspiring. they are just so keen our replacements have arrived. they are here. step aside as i'm now stepping aside for you john. >> any questions about writers or broadcasters or musicians that you enjoy. any upcoming people that you

follow. >> was this past or future? >> currently. >> i always love to hang out with people from texas. texas is like a foreign country to me. we just lost a great texas musician who was the greatest story teller i think i ever met. he was a barber in the army. just his stories about barbering alone let alone his stories about bob wills and willie nelson and lyle lovett and all the rest. i told myself 20 years ago i was going to go down to dripping springs, texas and i was going to sit there and get johnny gim niny gimbell to talk to me and write

his biography. i will regret that. musician are wonderful story tellers because they don't have much money and they have to travel around and make their way by the grace of other people. they have to learn to live on the hospitality and the kindness of strangers just as tennessee williams said. this makes them beautiful story storytellers. thank you for reminding me. i'll try to do that in the future. >> one question is what is the meaning of life? the other question is we read woe be gone boy and main street in class as representative of small town america. how do you compare your minnesota with main street by

sinclaire louis? >> what was the meaning of sinclaire louis's life? he was a lot funnier writer than people give him credit for. he was a great american writer. i read him in junior high school. he was a satirist and so they didn't care for him in minnesota. he lived uncomfortably in st. paul for brief periods of time. he had a lot of personal troubl of small town america was so colored by his own experience. he grew up the doctor's son in

minnesota. he was not physically well coordinated and he suffered a very bad facial complex as a result of small box scars. he was on out cast. he suffered terribly in his childhood. i did not. i grew up among sanctified brethren. we looked down on lutherans as being worldly and loose and we believed when the second coming occurred that jesus would bring a special car just for us. it's an entirely different upbringing. i led an upbringing of privilege. privilege. >> before i ask the last

question i just have a little bit of housekeeping. the national press club is the world's leading organization for journalist and we fight for a free press worldwide. to learn more about us visit press.org and to donate visit press press.org/institute. they may talk about whether he'll be on the $20 bill. on june 1st more than a dozen journalists who have been fined detained or jailed for their support of the first amendment will appear together at a press club event. that's on june 1st. i'd like to present mr. keillar with our traditional national press club mug.

[ applause ] we just have a little bit of time left. one time when you were here in the past you sang a song. i'm wondering if you'd be interested in singing a song again. [ applause ] >> i will if they will. that's the only deal. this will be my 16th point in my speech that every morning and every public school in america all of the children should face the teacher and they should all sing this song. ♪ ♪ my country tis of thee ♪ ♪ sweet land of liberty ♪ ♪ of thee i see ♪

♪ land where my fathers died ♪ ♪ land of the pilgrim pride ♪ ♪ from every mountainside left freedom ring ♪ [ applause ] >> since you picked a short song, we have a couple of minutes. i have a better finale. one of the questioners asked why you always wear red socks. i'm told you always wear a red

tie. maybe you can tell us why. >> i had pair of red socks once and i put them on for a show. people commented on it. nobody had ever commented on my wearing brown or black socks. when you're in the business of standing up in people you notice these things. i'm sorry, john it's not a longer answer but that's the truth. >> can we give a nice round of applause. [ applause ]

we hope that you don't wait 21 more years before you come back and see us. we thank you for being here today. we can't always guarantee that minnesotans will be in charge but we will extend warm welcome to you no matter who is running the national press club. i'm like to thank our staff for putting together this program. if you would like a copy of today's program or to learn more about the national press club, go to that website press.org. thank you. we are adjourned.