pool. >> i get that. but how are you mitigating the language barriers in a combat environment? >> and they're vetted for language in nepal first and then when they go through training in jordan, amman jordan, we don't just train them and test their skills with weapons, we test their language understanding and their ability to speak english. >> so all of these gerkas are english speaking? >> yes, sir. >> so why do we need -- >> why do we need what? >> why do we need nepalese then? if they're all proficient in the language, why was this an issue? >> let me just say this. it's a requirement and not every nepalese gerka on our post can read the washington post

from first page to the back page. i think that as a matter of policy and procedure and human rights we should have the posting of passports in nepal. i don't question for a minute we should have it from day one. we will now going forward. anything we communicate to the nepalese we do it both in english as well as the nepalese including their contracts, their employment contracts >> thank the chairman for additional time, and i yield back. >> thank you. now recognize mr. cummings for five minutes. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. i'd like to discuss the examination of two construction contracts at the kabul embassy. the first one was in 2009 and the second was awarded in 2010 to a different contractor, that's correct? >> that's correct. >> can you briefly describe the two things that were contracted

and their estimated completion dates? >> i believe the 2009 contract was to construct a number of temporary offices and housing. it was also to construct an office complex that my state colleagues have referred to as well as some additional warehouses, some compound assets facilities. permanent security features and other things. in the end, that contractor ended up building mostly just the temporary offices and housing. and the rest of those requirements were transferred to the 2010 contractor. >> now what about the leasing what were the projected completion dates on the projects? >> i don't have the projected completion date for the 2009 project at my fingertips. >> and mr. muniz the state department partially terminated the 2009 contract, and i quote

in part, due to concerns about contract are performance and schedule delays end of quote can you please explain exactly the concerns were what they were and why was the contractor's why were they terminated? what was the performance issue and schedule delays? >> so the contract included both temporary facilities and permanent facilities, and we knew there was a follow-on contract that would be building on that base and adding permanent facilities. we had concerns that the first contractor was not meet being key milestones and would not be able to meet their original schedule, which was the end of 2012 in a way that didn't interfere with the execution of the fy 10 contract. so the government terminated that contract for convenience. >> and have you experienced challenges terminating this

contract or other contracts due contractor delays? >> we do. it's a challenging circumstance. so we want to require contractors to perform. and we want to encourage them to have a track record of serious performance. it's actually under the excellence initiative one of the thins that we've pushed is going to best value awards as opposed to lowest cost, because we can hold contractors accountable based on past performance. it's complicated, and we always weigh a termination and the length of restarting with trying to push through with current contractors. in the instance of the 2009 contract without going too much into it, we just had concerns that in the much longer term it was going to become a challenge for our '10 contract and it would be most effective to terminate it with just the temporary facilities built and transfer the permanent facilities to the 2010 contract.

>> now mr. courts according to the gao's report, the rest of the contract was shifted to the second contractor who was working when the 2010 contract at that point, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. it also reveals that the estimated completion date of the expanded 2010 contract has been pushed out more than three years until 2017. >> that's correct. >> mr. courts, would it be accurate to say that part of this additional three years is due do the termination uh ofone of the contractors and subsequent transfer of one of the contractor elements to the other? >> i don't think there's any question that that did add time. >> were all of these modifications new? or did some have to do with the prior 2009 contract? >> i believe there was a mix of both. >> are you familiar with this? would you know that incident?

>> which modification? >> this was the, this, i guess this would be the 2009 contract. le then they had some modifications. would that have been the contract, mr. courts 2009 the modifications, that's right? >> both the 2009 and the 2010 contract had modifications. >> that's accurate. both had significant modifications. modifications. >> and how did those modifications come about? what happened? >> those were due to the increase in desk requirements. and, again, this is driven by national security priorities and the increase in staff. >> well, i'm going to unfortunately have to get to it in another meeting, but i think there are a lot of concerns here, and i go back to something that mr. duncan said and maybe you all can answer this for me, because i think he said something that seems to be so accurate. he questioned what is the

incentive for saving money? do we have any, mr. courts? in other words, it seems like we spend and spend and spend. the chairman has been very clear that we haven't, we probably could do better. so what is the incentive? and i got to ask you this mr. galeno, take one out of the we were just talking about this. what do you pay these nationals, by the way? >> salaries for the -- >> yeah, the nationals, the ones that you hold the passports up for, those, those folks. >> they're paid in the $40,000 to $50,000 range a year. >> $40,000 to $50,000? >> yes, sir. >> that's quite a bit of money for somebody over there isn't it? >> i think it's competitive with the, with the requirement -- >> no, i mean i'm glad to hear

that, and i'd like for you to give us some verification. i'd like to see the documentation. you have contracts with these people? >> yes i'll send documentation, i'll get back with you on that to confirm the rates. >> and do they have benefits? >> they have insurance benefits yes, they get a bonus payment at the end of their one-year contract. they get a bonus payment. >> and are they doing the same types of jobs as other folks who are not nationals? >> yes, sir. and you're telling me that the rates would be the same comparable for people who are doing the same work whether they are nationals or not? is that what you're telling me? >> the rates are different for ex-patriots. for u.s., performing certain types of work or slightly higher, because it's a market-driven thing. we can't hire u.s. person -- >> i understand that. but i'm trying to make sure. i'm just trying to figure out what you are paying.

and i guess, if you're using our dollars, which you are. >> right. >> i'm trying to maybe sure you -- i want to know what you're paying, and i want to know, i want detailed information about that. >> sure. be happy to have our staff provide that to you. but the premise is this. if you don't need to hire all u.s. personnel, and you can usefully-qualified third-country nationals to that operate in the same kinds of jobs with weapons, that drives the cost down. >> i'm trying to make sure we don't have a situation where we've got people making peanuts who don't, yeah. >> no, sir, we don't. >> let me finish. and then we've got contractors, stockholders and others who are making millions. and i just want to make sure we i read all, i read your

statement and you talked about reputation integrity, compliance and all this kind of thing, and that's good. but i want to see some records as to what you're paying these people, all right? >> yes, sir. we'll provide it. >> thank you very much. >> i got to wrap up with a few different questions, and then we will conclude this hearing. appreciate your patience. been here a long time. mr. hays, part of what mr. cummings and i have discussed and we will formalize is we're going to request of you that we look at the contracts, really around the globe. i'm not suggesting we do each and every market, but find a way to look at how these security contracts work for the security, it plays such a vital role and we have had some feedback in some countries that these people are not being paid very well. i'm not suggesting that is at all the case with aegis i'm not

suggesting that at all. i'm just saying we would like to look at it and feel more comfortable with it and we'll formalize something with you. there are two recommendations where there seems to be a bit of conflict, and you'd like to clarify that. and if there's still conflict there's still conflict. but recommendation two on page 50 says gao recommends the secretary of state consider establishing minimum security standards or other guidance for the construction of temporary skruk tours egg personally those used in conflict environments. second says ds does not support separate standards for temporary structures. why not? >> it's still a disagreement, sir. we still maintain that our goal is to try to meet the permanent standards, the highest level standards as best we can. and if we can't then we have to look at what risk that entails.

we may have to give exceptions or waivers but it is our goal to try in those situations to meet the highest level security standard we can. >> and mr. courts, why did you make that recommendation? ? >> well, let's just point to the osb standards that mr. starr pointed to as the goal that they're trying to achieve. in reality, the only buildings that can actually meet those standards are permanent structures. they do have the waivers process that mr. starr referred to. that's supposed to be a process where mitigation strategies are proposed and considered as a condition for granting the waiver and then a very conscious and explicit acceptance of the risk considering all of those factors. in actual practice we found that the state doesn't always follow that policy we found a number of instances in kabul with temporary facilities that did not have those required waivers, so that process that

was just described wasn't followed there. so we think something's not working in establishing some sort of standards, state is really uncomfortable with the word standards or other guidance, and they propose perhaps some template or lessons learned document that takes the lessons learned from the experience that we've already had in kabul and perhaps provide some information to those providing temporary facilities in the future, and if they follow through we could meet the intent of our recommendation. >> i think part of the concern, at least high concernmy concern, is that some of these temporary facilities end up not being so temporary. many are there for a decade if not longer, and it is much more convenient, a lot easier and less paperwork to deem it a temporary facility. therefore you don't have to comply with all these other standards. so i think this is part of the problem we got ourselves in

libya. this is part of the problem in some of these other places. and granted, they're very difficult, tightly-configured situations, but to say that there ought to be some minimum standard or guidance, it seems like a reasonable request. we're not solving that here, but it's something that's on our radar that we do need to solve. on page 51 recommendation three, we may have exhausted this but develop a kabul strategic facilities plan, such a plan should comprehensively outline existing facilities, and we'll go through this as we give the staff briefing. so appreciate you doing that. i don't have another question about that. and director, have you issued any official policies or directives related to obo's use of design excellence? >> we've revised many of our

policies and procedures to reflect our trying to do work in different ways again to include doing best-value awards as opposed to lowest cost. i believe that we have revised probably the last two or three years over 30 p and pds. we could get you exact numbers on those. >> i guess if you have issued directives related to design excellence, is it reasonable by the august 9th meeting that you would provide that? i'm hoping this is just a photo copying exercise. i'm not asking you to create anything new. i'm just trying to get a snap soth of where are you at right now here today? ? i guess in my mind ex-lens is just a way of approaching our work and us trying to do our work in the best way we can, there isn't one policy written about excellence it sort of permeates through all of our policies. so if the request is for acopy

of all of our revised policies -- >> we had embassy design which was put forward by secretary powell. design excellence was change the by secretary clinton. there was a new direction a new approach it's new, it's different, but what we haven't seen is what is that directive? what is that plan? what is that strategy? i've seen bits and parts of it, but it's not just some nebulous, hey, this is just a theory we want to be great in everything we do. it was a concerted effort to change the way we were building embassies into a new design excellence plan. >> absolutely. so when you ask, is there one policy that reflects that i could give you general documents that highlight what the excellence program is. we could go to all of the policies and procedures that have been changed to reflect that. we could go to the standards,

which are basically a flexible set of standards that we provide all of our ark tentchitects and engineers to say these are the basic requirements and put our buildings together. so we could give you many documents, i think you have requested many of those already and we're in the process of giving those, so i'm happy again to have our folks work with yours and to prioritize the list of things that you're asking for and to make sure that you get every single thing that you're asking for. >> this is sort of the recurring theme here. we're asking what was the plan for kabul, and there wasn't one. what is the plan for design excellence as opposed to standard embassy design, which was pretty fairly clearly defined. >> there are plans for both. and we can provide you documents for all of those things if we haven't already. >> that would be great, because we have been asking for a long period of time. and we still haven't got to that

point where you could say, all right, now based on this, you should be able to understand everything we're doing with design excellence. that's what we're trying to get to. that's why we keep asking. that's the goal. but i need your help in getting to that point. >> i understand. >> mr. starr you're involved in the construction of the new embassy compound in jakarta indonesia, correct? have you conducted any blast testing for the facade of the jakarta facility? >> not on that particular one. we've done extensive testing on facades and blast facades and what levels they'll meet. i'm confident that that building meetings or exceeds our blast standards. >> but it has been the practice to do an actual blast test on the facade that would be there in jakarta? >> no. in that case, it was within the

design engineering parameters that the blast engineers felt comfortable that looking and reviewing the drawings, they said yes, this meets the parameters. we did blast testing on the london design because these were very harm and a different type of design but the parameters on jakarta fell within what the engineers were very comfortable with. they're very experienced and they're confident absolutely, that it exceeds our blast requirements. >> and can you provide us that documentation? ? . >> yes, i think we can. >> it's my understanding that we actually conduct actual blast testing, you're telling me we use the exact facade that has gone through the other physical testing? is there anything, in other words, is there anything different about this facade or wall that is, that has not been used before previously?

>> let me take part of that question. so the curtain wall in the curtain wall used in jakarta is not dissimilar to the curtain wall used in london to the degree that those are curtain walls that have what we call an open light. as you know there were tests performed on the london embassy and the performance, and those tests went very well. >> but there were several times where it did fail, correct? >> no. >> you're telling me they didn't do any tests where they failed? ? i'm telling you there was one full-scale blast test and it passed. >> but there were previous tests on that wall that failed. >> there were component tests that were derived to provide nafgs for the final blast test, but there was one blast test of the full curtain wall and it passed. >> okay. that's not my understanding of it. i mean, i think we actually have video of it so be careful there, but i don't believe that

the original tests that were done on the blast wall in london passed. >> there was one full-scale test of the curtain wall in london and it passed, and it passed with flying colors. >> using the exact same wall in jakarta? ? we are . >>que are not use we are not using the exact same wall. there are variations. and it has been used for years. when they were comfortable from the results of the london test that this solution worked, they accepted the calculations many of these performance standards are met by calculation and by engineers who have done this for years. ds and the engineers who developed the curtain wall were comfortable that they met all of the standards. >> sir we've done a prmd amount of blast testing over the years. and what we do is test to find

out what works and what doesn't work. in early stages we often find things that don't work and then we correct them and then we eventually get to the point where we think we've got a high level of confidence. and then we did the large-scale test of all of the panels. and then that passed. so failure at an earlier stage in blast testing gives us the information to make the corrections and do the right things so when we get to that engineering point we know we have a product that works. >> and so how would you categorize where we're at in jakarta and this blast wall? >> sir, we wrote a certification to congress. anytime we build a building, we tell you that that building is going to meet or exceed the security standards and be safe and secure for our people, our national security activities and our information. and we sense that certification to congress and that building will pass everything. >> for the one in jakarta.

>> yes. >> is the embassy current in jakarta currently scheduled to be delivered as it's originally scheduled, or if it's not on time, when will it be done? >> right now our contract completion is 2017. as you might know jakarta was built on an existing embassy compound, so we were working with a very tight site. had a multi-phase project where the first phase had to was to move most of the embassy function off the compound to allow for the construction of the full embassy. we encountered some difficulties with the contractor in that first phase which has delayed the later phase. we are working with the current contractor who is a very strong contractor through the project to see what time can be made up for. but right now there are no final adjustments to the project schedule. >> so it will be on time, or you

think it might be delayed, but you just don't have a date yet? >> i think it might be delayed, but we don't have a date finalized. but when we do contractually we can provide that. >> and how does it compare to the original budget? >> do my knowledge right now, we are on budget. >> are there any anticipated requests from the contractor for addition alimony to complete the jakarta facility? >> i would say until a pro wrebt is completed, we always anticipate that there will be requests for equitable ajustments from contractors, so i would say that we expect them like we do on any project and we work through them. we manage to our budgets to the best that we can, to include, beginning to cut things out of the budget of the existing building. so that's just an ongoing process of just managing to the budget. >> are you aware of any upcoming requests for addition alimony to

build and finish the jakarta embassy? >> i believe i already answered your question, but i can answer it again. like with any contract -- >> i'm asking if you have any direct knowledge that they're about to ask you for a lot of additional money? do you or do you not? >> i don't. ? >> do you, mr. starr? >> no, i certainly don't. >> i want to ask you just one more time. contractor indicated any intention to request an equitable adjustment. ms. muniz? >> i've answered this question a number of times. >> i'm going to ask it because i obviously know something about this, and i want you to be direct and complete with -- you act as if it's your money and there isn't going to be some sort of consequence here. there's obviously a lot of information i have at my

disposal, and i want to know if you're going to be truthful and honest with us because you have yet to show or demonstrate to the united states congress that you can produce a project on budget on time that is safe and secure. it hasn't happened. we keep seeing overrun after overrun after overrun. mexico city, mozambique zimbabwe jakarta. the list is pretty long. london. >> i can go through -- if you want to have another hearing. >> oh, we're going to. you're going to be a regular visitor up here. no doubt about it. >> i'm happy to do that. >> then provide us the documents we ask. and be forthright in your comments. ? we have provided you with over 60,000 pages. >> i want to know what percentage. i'm tired of the state department telling us we've been given a certain number of documents. we are asking for basic documenting, for instance your testimony by a certain time. which was late everybody else was on time, except yours.

it's unbelievable how you respond to us. and we're not going to continue to stand for that. you're right. we will continue to drag you up here. we'd rather not. we'd much rather have sfaf meeting and get this information. ? and we have been having those staff meetings, and we have provided a great deal of information. i'm happy to continue to do so. all of the questions and concerns that have been raised about the excellence initiative with respect to cost and schedule are valid concerns, but we have answers to all of those and i'm also happy to report that of the four excellence initiative projecting or five that you have requested which ones would we say are under excellence? all of them are being delivered on budget, on schedule. the only one delayed is because of a new msg activation and we had to extend a contract to build the marine headquarters after the initial contract. everything is as it should be. >> what are those four? >> one minute.

>> intention, pair me bow, walk taun and -- >> thank you. two more questions. in iraq you recall off the top of your head, granted the focus of this hearing is about afghanistan. the number of beds and desks built versus numbers of beds and desks occupied? do you have that number? or is that something you can provide this committee at some point? >> i think that's something we can provide. it's not something i have off the top of my head. >> okay, i hope it's not a difficult ask and we would expect and hope that you would get it to us sooner rather than

later. last question, set of questions here on cyber security. are you aware of any network disruptions or cyber intrusions that have affected obo at the state department? >> we have not -- we have had network intrusions. they have not affected any of our databases and obo was not affected by them. they affected our e-mails at one point, but they did not affect any of our databases or our systems. >> is there any indication that any systems containing sensitive information about our embassies' physical security was either viewed or compromised, extracted or hacked into in any way, shape, or form? >> i'm not aware of any information to that point. >> nothing regarding your department ms. muniz? >> not that i know of, not that i know of. we could go back and look.

and ask the appropriate people, but i'm not sure what you're referring to. >> sir, through the years, and i'm going back quite a ways. there were incidents where some documents were improperly handled. security violations were hand out and procedures were improved. i don't think, i don't believe there's been any cyber intrusions into this. >> it's just over the last 12 months, obviously. we've had a number issues and incidents and some very high-profile intrusions. we're in a regular basis going to be asking departments and agencies as they come up here if that's been affecting them in any way, shape, or form. it's just sort of a general question that we're going to be asking. it's been a long hearing thank you for your time. we do appreciate it. a lot of good men and women do a lot of good service. they care about their country, they're working hard. please we know and appreciate this is part of the process in the united states of america. it's what makes our country

great. it's why our founders in their infinite wisdom set this up this way. and that's our role and responsibility under the constitution, and we're going to fulfill it. and we appreciate you doing your jobs, and gone, we thank you for your time. this committee stands adjourned. friday on c-span 3, a discussion about terrorism in the middle east and south asia. military and foreign policy analysts will discuss efforts to fight isis in iraq and syria,

and the threat al qaeda poses in afghanistan and pakistan. live coverage begins at noon eastern time here on c-span 3. here's some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. with the upcoming release of harper lee's new novel c-span focuses on the novelist. we talk about the impact on lee's work "to kill a mockingbird." we'll also re-air these programs sunday evening beginning at 6:30 eastern. also hugh hewitt on hillary clinton's second run for president. on c-span, saturday night, starting at 8:00. congressional commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the vietnam war with readings and remarks by members of congress. and gop candidate carly

fiorina visits with new hampshire voters. saturday at 8:00 eastern on lectures and history the factors that led to the great depression and president roosevelt's actions to help the american people and the economy. and sunday evening at 6:30 a best-selling novelist on general sherman and why sherman is not the villain of popular legend. get the complete schedule at c-span.org. garrison keillor recently announced plans to leave the show at the end of the year. humorist and author garrison keillor spoke at a national press club luncheon recently and gave advice to the movers and shakers in town.

this is about an hour. >> welcome to the national press club. my name is john hughes, i'm an editor for bloomberg first word the breaking news desk here in washington and i'm president of the club. just for today i also want to mention i am a native minnesotan. [ applause ] so our guest today is minnesota's garrison keillor the greatest american storyteller and host of the long running radio show. a prairie home companion. i want to introduce our head table. each person should stand briefly as names are announced. from the audiences right, sam husseini communications director at the institute for public accuracy. laura litvan, reporter from bloomberg news. al eisley a minnesota native.

former washington correspondent for night ritter editor at large for the hill and former press secretary for vice president walter mondale. martha craver, associate editor for the kiplinger letter. allen bierga a minnesotan and agriculture reporter for bloomberg news and former national press club president. tameka smith, national public radios wamu. allison fitzgerald managing editor for finance at the center for public integrity. skipping over our speaker for a moment, angela keen a minnesotan, a white house correspondent for bloomberg news, a former national press club president, and the speaker's committee member who organized today's lunch. thank you, angela. menachem wecker, a tremendous

reporter who covers art, religion and education. elizabeth jia a multimedia reporter producer or cbs affiliate wusa channel 9. verdoze al farouk medical reporter for the gray sheet. and devon henry a native minnesotan and energy and environment reporter for the hill. [ applause ] i want to welcome our c-span and public radio audiences. and remind you that you can follow the action today on twitter. use the #npclunch. and remember the public attends our lunches. applause is not evidence of a lack of journalistic objectivity. well garrison keillor is a storyteller, author, humorist and radio personality.

he's best known as the voice on the radio program he created 40 years ago. a prairie home companion is now heard by more than 4 million listeners each week. the program as we know is set in lake woe begin, a fictional town in minnesota. this is the place where children are above average, men are good looking, and women are strong. as a humorist, keeler is often compared with mark twain and will rogers. like mr. rogers, keillor has made multiple visits here to the national press club. he spoke here in 1986, 1987, and he spoke again in 1949. after 21 years, we are so glad that he's back again and clearly he was waiting until minnesotans were more in charge of the place before he was going to come back. keillor is in the nation's capital for performances at wolf trap today and tomorrow, and

this summer he hits the road for a prairie home companion's america the beautiful. this is a tour of 30 cities in 36 days. his latest book, the keillor reader, just came out in soft cover and on july 4th, a prairie home companion will celebrate its 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. keillor is active in democratic politics so he 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 keillor. [ applause ]

>> thank you very much. john, you're much too kind. don't make that mistake again. you'll be held to account. honored to be here with you, and such a great honor that 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 baccalaureate address at princeton university. i was up in princeton earlier this week, and it all came back to me much too clearly. so i wrote this speech. i thought i should say something inspiring to these young

graduates and something about, you know, life is adversity, and you know, it's in struggle that we come to understand ourselves. and then i thought, no i should make it funny. and, so i worked on that. and i had a story in there 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 so i was going to do that. and then i wasn't sure that princeton graduates would know what an outhouse was. so, i revised that. and wound up in princeton with this speech in high pocket, and it was an academic procession through the campus, through these, you know, silent, you know, awestruck crowds. and all of these people with gorgeous academic robes and

multicolored hoods, and sashes, and so on, from having gotten a ph.d. at oxford or cambridge or, you know, dubai, or the university of phoenix or wherever. and 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 fulsom 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 nave, and you have to climb this steep stairway, two-part stairway, up to the pulpit, which is up against a wall, a stone wall. 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 conceptually funny. and there was -- and there was nothing, people looked sort of studious and their eyes were closed, some of them. and there was a little bit of laughter way off in the corner. but not much. and, 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, 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 i was saying -- 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. and there was grateful applause. and i came down and through the crowd, and to 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, and, you know, not that i disagree with that fourth point that you made. which i hadn't made. and it dawned on me i thought at this reception and in the long, painful ride back home to minnesota, that as i look 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 be 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 -- it was like -- it was like when the plane finally begins to move, you've been sitting on the tarmac for hours, perhaps days, you've lost track, you've heard one explanation after another, weather related, air traffic control, a flashing light in the cockpit, one pilot is depressed, i don't know what. but, and then finally you begin to move and you feel incredulity. that's how i felt when the president announced that 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. i was writing poems in all lowercase 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 that's going to open up between miami, key west, and havana. the minnesota orchestra has gone on tour to cuba. they were thrilled. they came back ecstatic. these are musicians, they never get ecstatic.

and things aren't -- things are happening. it's just so utterly astonishing. the president recognizing reality. i felt the same way when he announced that he was going to take executive action to protect 5 million undocumented workers from deportation. nobody was ever talking about deporting these people. because they work. we need them. they're part of our economy. perhaps 11 million undocumented workers. nobody was talking about shipping them out. the work, the paperwork, just astonishing to think of what it would take and nobody wants to send them away so why not recognize them and give them some stability in our country so that people cannot pay them $0.85 an hour and have the 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 that need to happen tomorrow. washington has such a reputation for inaction and blockade and dysfunction that some of small symbolic thing would be a good first move and i think it is time to finally name the streets downtown the only have initial letters. i just -- everybody else names their streets. and why not? i think they should be named for philosophers just to give the city some tone, you know, some class. only suggestions. but emerson, franklin, hagel,

henry james, kierkegaard for "k" street, why not? martin luther. machiavelli, of course. and so on. number 2. see how quickly the speech moves along? number 2, i think we need to relax with the flag pins. i am 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 has become required that the president end every speech with god bless america just so people won't question whether or not he loves his country and i think it is of bad way to go. this is a free country. it really is. i mean, 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 to -- and the swastika had to be the right size and you had to say -- and pronounce it correctly and your right arm had to be at the correct angle. let's not go too far. i looked senator john mccain's web site and there are pictures of him there and he has no flag pin in his lapel. so if he doesn't need to wear one, than 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 person 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 is 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 to that. i also think we can continue the movement in this country to remove some of those fortifications, the barriers, the flower pots and so forth that were put up in public places to defend someone driving a truck loaded with explosives. they do not have a good purpose. they're more symbolic and anything else, symbolic security is dangerous and engineers told us that in the case of most of these barriers if a truck loaded with explosives pulled up

alongside and was detonated, these barriers would be splintered and they would become flying missiles, and we don't need that anymore of that. number 4, i think we should stop making dimes, nickels and pennies. i just think it is 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 don't go there. the fund-raiser for polio used to be called the march of dimes, but dimes don't march anymore. they just -- they don't. they are not worth enough. we used to say a penny for your thoughts. we don't say that anymore because it would be insulting. so i think if we leave the current supply of small change in circulation, it will gradually, you know, dissipate

and disappear and these coins will in time become more valuable. so let's just try that. number 5. we need to change the seating arrangement in the house and the senate. mix democrats and republicans in the chambers so that members don't have to reach across the aisle. they can just turn to the person next to them and hold out their hand, if they wish. schoolteachers know that when cliques or gangs form in the public school, you separate them. you don't let them all sit together. we need to do this in congress. no more red on one side, blue on the other. we should go for a checkerboard effect here. and seat them by seniority with the old ones way in the back and the young ones down front just so they get the idea.

number 6. it just 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 that if you work hard and you 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 backseat of your car and your car is up on blocks 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 it is to do it. number 7. here is 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 sold. 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 coffers. radio and tv spectrums are public property and they should be required, radio and it have 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 to the fcc that at 4:00 a.m. on sunday they played something from the league of women voters and that is all they had to do. it was a ritual, and meaningless ritual. but it symbolized the fact that the station, the frequency is public property and that they had public responsibility. number 8. our u.s. seventh fleet has been sent off to support japan in its defense of the senkaku islands in the south china sea which are also claimed by china, the senkaku islands, which are at last word, unpopulated, nobody lives out there, which 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 nature conservancy go out there and defend that. let green peace and some people in boats. but not our seventh fleet. number 9. the drought in california is simply meant to show people that you cannot have a nice green lawn in a desert. it doesn't work. in minnesota we don't have giant space heaters in our backyards to make it possible for us to sit in our backyards in february and barbecue. we don't expect that. [ applause ] 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. they are major exporters of almonds and alfalfa and avocados, all heavy water-use crops. and those are just the ones that

begin with the letter "a." there are a lot more. california is 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. number 10. thanks to alaska and texas and north dakota. our country is close to being energy independent. for this reason we need to take a deep breath and we need to back away from the middle east. these tribes of the middle east that european colonizers 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 is not much we can do to assist that.

what we spend 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 had 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 by-product 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? and it's time to think again about nuclear power, which was cheap and efficient.