that is less -- seems more on the legal side, subpoenas, i'm just hoping to never experience. thank you. >> steve, send him a subpoena. >> i'll be real quick. you're raising obviously big questions about the overall funding for congress and for the agencies. those are really big issues, and beyond the scope of this conference i suggest. i would just say that resources are an issue and when there are investigations that are very broad ranging and with lots and lots of document requests and it appears to be clear from an administration perspective that this is really partisan driven and not seriously driven to improve government and get a better result, it adds to the resentment and it makes the accommodation process more difficult and i think probably

elongates the process and makes it difficult to have the professionals like you would have in a lawyer situation where you've got a tough negotiation. just get to the bottom line more quickly. i think it's an kpexacerbating issue. the reality is administrations find the resources they need to get these things done. but when there's not a lot of respect on either side of the aisle -- not the aisle, the avenue, then the resources issue exacerbates the problem. >> i think i agree. it probably contributes. i don't really know. i don't have any empirical data. i suspect you're probably right that there are resource issues on either end of this. i doubt there are adequate resources on both ends of it.

i don't think the problem goes away. at the moment at least i think it is a more philosophically driven argument between the branches. >> it's concerns about congressional staffing levels and having adequate congressional staff to do oversight was one of the main driving factors of the 1947 congressional reorganization act, which did significantly increase the staff resources. but one of the more robust public polling findings is that people across both parties think that members of congress have too many staffers and they think members of congress have an order of magnitude, more staff than they do. people think there's this giant army of congressional staff. everybody in the room knows that true and they've want to see it cut. since the 80s, it's been hard to push for more congressional staff because of those two intertwined misconceptions.

there is >> there is a 1/3 less staff at least over the last two decades. it's shrivelled. people don't stay enough. aid has been cut, and that's an important incentive for having the institutional memory that allows for more effective oversight and comfortableness between the branches and on the hill itself. >> we have time for one more question. yes, brandon. >> brandon sawyer. i had a question. we've talked a lot about committees and subpoena power. do you have any insight into the

individual role of members that aren't chairmen of the committee? how can they exercise oversight in things like the senate to get information wholly unrelated to the merits of that nomination? is that in the seemingly category or going nuclear category? >> it's not going nuclear. this is conventional warfare. [ laughter ] >> and it's very effective. having been held up twice in many months. >> rand paul did this with david baron for circuit. he did it with dci. he's gotten in many cases a lot of what he wanted out the administration.

when i say i think it's great, what i mean is i think it is great as a way of members of congress getting what they want. i don't necessarily agree with paul's goals in their particular cases, but -- what i started out talking about, congress has all these different levers. houses have levers they can pull. individual members have levers they can pull. another thing they can do by the way leaking state secrets. it's one way members have influence in public policy in really helpful ways actually. >> don't go there. don't go there. >> so for example, a senator leaked the pentagon papers to the press. actually in the 70s a lot of what led to the creation of the church committee was leaks that had come out of congress. in the 80s, leaks about cia activities came again out of congress in ways that have been tremendously helpful.

as long as it's members doing it on the floor, which in many cases it has been, henry gonzalez in the early 90s in the run-up to the first iraq war, that is one of the constitutional tools they can use. >> yes, and you understand that the executive branches' argument with the respect to anything that might be sensitive is we can't give it to you because you will leak it. >> that's their argument no matter what happens. if you look at all the major leaks recently, it's all executive branch. chelsea manning was military. edward snowden was nsa. that's the argument they're going to use, but they're going to use that argument whether it's true or not. >> next up we have the vice president of the constitution project with a few remarks, but before we get to scott, please join me in thanking this distinguished panel of experts.

thank you. scott? >> thanks very much, joslin. i have to say i didn't think that was the discussion i was going to follow. i want to take two or three minutes to offer a few concluding observations on the basis of what i think were two terrific panels today. and i want to start by taking a step back to comments senator levin made at the outset. an effective oversight system is important to our democracy. it should be important to all of us, not just immediate stakeholders in the process. and i think we've heard different folks on both panels sort of touch on some of what makes high quality oversight and the kind of obstacles that stand its in way. i think it is worth highlighting a few of those things on the way out, particularly given the point that ron white flagged on

the first panel. presidential elections coming up with uncertain results are a good time to reflect on all these issues. some of the characteristics i noted that folks identified. probably the number one that it is fact based and not politically driven. it has an effectively legitimate si to it. that it's bipartisan. that it's in-depth so there's a mechanism if there's an investigation for oversight to then be ongoing. there can be follow up and regular monitoring whatever the initial sort of investigation is. that executive branch folks who are the subject of oversight feel like they're being treated fairly even if the process is adversarial. some of the challenges or obstacles that i noted that

folks raised. low quality oversight might have been the most repeated one. when the executive branch feels that the oversight is politically driven or it's unduly burdensome in some other way, that it isn't bipartisan. insufficient resources or capacity for committees and staff or the members who are carrying this out. andy's point is there an inherent philosophical difference between the branches with respect to oversight. i think both of those sort of characteristics of high quality oversight and the challenges and obstacles that stand in their way suggest some potential conditions for facilitating better oversight going forward. i think some of them are going

to be obvious from what i've flagged already. avoiding low quality partisan oversight so courts don't have to step in and fix rights and responsibilities on both sides in a way that neither branch may find acceptable going forward. making sure committees have experienced professional staff with the appropriate resources and training. ways to build relationships between executive branch personnel and the committees that oversee them. maybe there need to be more opportunities if staff turnover is happening at a rate that it wasn't previously. one that i find really interesting that was brought up numerous times is the 80/20 problem. if 20% of the oversight is what the public sees and if that partisan driven part is that

20%, they don't know there's anything working. is there a way to raise up the 80%? again, flag this all because i think it's an important time to be thinking about it. as david said, these are not issues that we sort of dove into in depth today and it is sort of beyond the scope of this conference. i hope the various stakeholders who i know who are in the room and may have tuned in remotely you'll think seriously about this stuff and the ways in which they can facilitate more effective oversight in the next administration and the congress to come. i want to thank the senators, all of our panelists, pew center for hosting this. i really thought this was a

terrific event. please join me in thanking them. [ applause ] our road to the white house coverage continues as both major party candidates are on the campaign trail today.

we'll be live at 8:00 p.m. eastern with donald trump and mike pence in the battleground state of wisconsin. see that tonight on c-span. about 45 minutes later, it's democrat hillary clinton campaigning in florida. see her remarks live at 8:45 eastern on c-span 2. on election day, november 8th, the nation decides our next president and which party controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage of the presidential race, including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump, and their surrogates. and follow key house and senate races with our coverage of their candidate debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily. this week on c-span 2 we're featuring political radio programs with national talk show hosts. on wednesday, live from washington, d.c., conservative

radio talk show host hugh hewitt is live from 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. eastern. live thursday from noon to 3:00, tom hartman. on friday from 9:00 a.m. until noon, a conservative political perspective on the mike gallagher show live from new york city. all this week live on c-span 2. the european commission president and european council president each delivered statements recently at the european parliament on the conclusion of the most european union summit, which included discussions on brexit, migration, and relations with russia.

>> translator: ladies and gentlemen, at the beginning of today's hearing, of having spoken to the president of the european counsel and the president of the european commission and given the fact that all three institutions are present this morning, i've decided to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the uprising of the people of hungary against the soviet dictatorship. 60 years ago on monday, the uprising began. it lasted many weeks and cost many lives. the people of hungary rose up against the dictatorship of a brutal and oppressive foreign

regime unrivalled in its violence. the struggle of the hungarian people against the soviet occupier is a struggle that's gone down in history and won't be forgotten. the example which the people of hungary set in 1956 also had consequences. the heros of that struggle acted as models to others around the world, not just in hungary. people around the warsaw pact saw how you could stand up against the occupier. this uprising wasn't the first, but it was one of the most important in a long line of such uprisings. and after decades of oppression, eventually it led to success. without the enormous courage shown in 1956, the subsequent courage shown in the 1980s, and

in 1989 when hungary opened its borders to austria, without that president, that courage would not have been possible. the courage of that uprising was fueled by the desire of the people of hungary to rejoin with the european family. in 1989, people whom schmidt was asked to choose between the east and the west and he said, no, we've chosen europe. with that philosophy in mind, the fight against oppression across central and eastern europe was inspired by the struggle of the hungarians, a struggle which was ultimately for europe. this morning i had the opportunity to talk about this with donald tusk, somebody who himself back in the 1980s was a freedom fighter, who went to

prison for his beliefs. as a result, he underlined a real solidarity he feels with the people of hungary. i think the european parliament has a duty to extend its solidarity to the people of hungary. we should never forget the many thousands of men and women who were forced to fight against e dictatorship were forced to leave their country and many were welcomed as refugees. so in your name, i hope i have successfully conveyed our solidarity to the people of hungary. [ applause ] >> translator: as i announced on monday, ladies and gentlemen, i have referred the matter of the altercation between two members of this parliament to the

advisory committee on the conduct of members. i have asked the committee to deal with this matter as a matter of urgency. the advisory committee has transmitted to me its recommendation. it concluded that the versions of the facts given by the two members involved diverge substantially. it also stressed given the seriousness of the reported facts and their criminal implications further evidence is needed to clarify this matter. as a result, i have decided to follow the recommendation of the advisory committee, and i have referred this matter to the compete competent french authorities. based on the result of the investigations, i will then make a decision about a sanction being imposed pursuant to 166 of parliament's rules and procedures. i will of course keep you

informed about the follow up given to this regrettable incident. moving on to the first item of today's agenda, before taking that item, ladies and gentlemen, i have an administrative announcement to make. on my left, we have the deputy general secretary of the european parliament who is sitting in the plenary seating for the last time today. she's been working for the european parliament since 1979. she started her career in the european parliament as a personal assistant, the gentleman after whom the main building in brussels is named.

i think she had a front row seat in the building of the european union. since then she's taken on a whole series of roles and through both her work and her personality, she's immediate ma enormous contribution to the work of the european parliament and the european union. thank you. [ applause ]

>> translator: so the agenda. the first item this morning is the conclusions of the european council meeting of the 20th and 21st of october. the first speaker is the president of the council, mr. tusk. >> the european council last week met on three important topics. on migration, for the first time for more than a year, the european council was not a crisis meeting. the flows to the greek islands are down 90% to last year.

however irregular knows on the central european route from africa to italy remain far too high and have not changed for the last two years. we focused much of our discussion on the cooperation with africa. leaders heard from the high representative on efforts to control the flows in the central mediterranean in partnership with key countries. good groundwork has been laid with senegal, mali, nigeria, and ethiopia on the so-called migration compacts. our goal is to prevent illegal migration to italy and the rest of europe and to ensure effective returns of irregular migrants. leaders also discussed getting

back to lifting boat controls over time. it has to be accompanied by enforcement of the external borders. the commission will come forward with its recommendations on this basis. the question of the reform of the common european asylum discussion wwas also discussed including on how to combine responsibilities and solidarity in the future. we agreed to consider proposals from the slovak president on the this issue in december. we also heard discussion about russia. several countries ranging from information campaigns, cyber attacks, interference in the political process in the eu and

elsewhere to the fanning of community conflict in ukraine and the balkans and further afield. the result of the mh-17 investigation as well. we had a sober assessment of this reality and no illusions. increasing tensions with russia is not our aim. we are simply reacting to steps taken by russia who is working with considerable energy and focus to weaken a divided eu. our long-term objective means sticking to our values and interests, but also keeping the door open to dialogue. we all agreed that the european union approaching russia is our greatest strength, so we'll

stand united. we also discussed syria. we condemned attacked by the syrian regime and its allies, notably russia, in aleppo. the eu is calling for an end to the atrocities and an immediate cessation of hostilities. we asked the high representative to pursue further diplomatic and humanitarian efforts. if these atrocities continue, all available options will be considered. the syrian people need an immediate and permanent cease-fire and a reopening of humanitarian aid corridors. the last issue we discussed was trade. our citizens are increasingly concerned about whether the trade deals we negotiate are in the best interest.

and i'm afraid we won't be able to continue to negotiate free trade agreements if we do not prove that we are very serious about protecting european customers and companies. and when we discussed it, we drew a big red line between protection and protectionism. in an agreement on the modernization of the eu's trade instruments, i know this parliament is ready to support this. we have now tasked our trade ministers with breaking the deadlock. when it comes to fita, the eu is not ready to sign the agreement with canada, but talks continue in belgium also this morning. i thank all those who have

helped facilitate these talks. you have showed genuine leadership and responsibility. thank you very much for your help, but at the end of the day only the belgians can decide on belgium's position. i am impressed by the determination and engagement they have shown during the last hours. i still hope that belgium will prove that it is a consensus building champion and we'll be able to finalize this agreement soon. here i must also express my gratitude to the canadian side for their cooperation and perseverance. if we cannot make the case for free trade with a country like canada, the most european country outside europe and a close friend and ally, there are

obvious consequences for europe's global position. but it is too early to go there yet. as we speak, the summit tomorrow is still possible. on the ukraine cessation agreement and the fta, the dutch prime minister informed the european council about the difficulties in ratifying the agreeme agreement. a prime minister promised to use the next nfew days to work out solution with the parliament. whatever the debate in the netherlands is going to be, it is clear we need to find a way ahead that is agreeable to the other 27 member states and to the ukraine. let me also report that we were glad to welcome prime minister may at the european council. she confirmed that the united

kingdom will invoke article 50 before the end of march next year. consistent with our policy of no negotiations without notification, we did not discuss brexit. let me recall the eu 27th position of the 29th of june. we want as close relations as possible with the u.k. and the u.k. can continue enjoying access to the finger market, but it requires accepting all four freedoms. to conclude, let me recall the meeting of the 27th of eu leaders that was held in september. we met informally to discuss the future of europe in light of the u.k. referendum on brexit.

it's also reflected at the meeting a number of actions to address the main concerns of europeans -- migration, security, both internal and external, and economic anxieties. it is now for member states and eu institutions to implement the road map, and as a matter of fact, we have started to do so. on the 5th of october, the eu ratified the parliament's agreement on climate change. the next day the european border and coast guard was launched in record time. here i wanted to thank the european parliament for its excellent and swift cooperation. and last week, the bulgarian prime minister thanked his colleagues for the support to help protect the borders with turkey as decided at the meeting. thank you. [ applause ]

>> translator: thank you, president. the next speaker is the president of the european commission. >> translator: good morning, mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, honorable members. the european council on thursday and friday last in brussels gave the impression to the outside world that we only discussed the free trade agreement with canada. that was not the case. there were other items for discussion and there was progress, notably in the field of migration. there is still a long way to go and there are many pitfalls on the way. to strengthen our shared border, we have created in record time a

european border and coast guard which is now in place and which now needs to be equipped with the staff and equipment it needs to be able to respond with the necessary speed. december is the date by which all of the planned systems have to be in place. i trust that the co-legislators will adopt it to contain european migration. fighting illegal migration, breaking up smuggling chains, and allowing legal migration to

europe allows us to work with turkey. and in the sixth months since the adoption of the eu-turkey agreement, the number of migrants -- in the six months since of the signing of the agreement, we have a reduction of 721,000 migrants crossing the border from turkey into greece. agreement, we have a reduction of 721,000 migrants crossing the border from turkey into greece. in six months in 2015, there were over 500,000. there were 582 deaths of migrants crossing between turkey and greece and in the same period this year it was 48. it is still 48 too many. we have to consolidate the fragile results achieved.

that means continuing to help greece. that means providing the officials necessary for the agencies working on the ground and we need to help unaccompanied minors. we need to continue relocating migrants from greece and continue the process of resettlement from turkey to europe. as president tusk said, we're continuing to work with our african partners. we are working to agree compacts with countries like nigeria, mali, and ethiopia. there is progress being made, but again this is a new form of cooperation which needs to be consolidated, extended to other countries, and the external investment plan must kick in.

we need to invest and we need to do so quickly. we also need to reform the european asylum regime, including the dublin mechanism. the commission has proposed a genuinely european mechanism based on solidarity in german. mr. president, i'd like to say a few words about sita. i trust that an agreement will be reached in the course of today between the governments of belgium and other parts of the country. i do not know if we will be able to sign the agreement with

canada tomorrow. in fact, signing tomorrow is not the point. what is the point is for agreement to be reached today so that the kingdom of belgium can sign the agreement at the appropriate moment. seta is an important trade agreement. all trade agreements are important. we europeans should not only insist on free trade. we should insist on fair trade. we are in favor of free trade, but not free trade being brought about at any price. the european union needs to

improve its trade defense instruments. high quality trade defense instruments are vital. in the preparations for the european council, i had a look at the figures, what the usa are doing and what the european union is doing. and i see that nobody is criticizing the usa. the americans impose 265% in anti-dumping duties on certain chinese steel products. the equivalent trade defense measure in the european union is

20% and that is not the way to fight overproduction in china. overproduction in china is double the level of production in the european union and hence we should not allow our hands to continue to be tied. the americans defend their industry, defend their steel industry, and we should do the same. [ applause ] >> translator: that's not the view of everyone in council. the member states fall into two categories. 1312 is the usual dividing line, and i insist that we improve the quality of our trade defense instruments and the future of

our industry, not just the steel industry, depends on that, and i'll continue to campaign for that. we need a qualified majority for that. now our relationship with our partners in the world would be easier if we made more of an effort to make europe's economy more competitive. many things would be easier if we were more competitive. and we really do need to tackle this issue. >> the results of the european investment plan. we have mobilize emobilized. we are pursuing the item to reach 350 billion from now to the year after next year.

we have proposed as a commission to double the financial amount of the investments, and we have proposed to the council to double the duration of the plan. the european council will come back to this issue in december, and i really do hope on the basis of all the external and internal assessments that we'll be provided -- that the european council will take a decision along the lines of the proposal of the commission. >> translator: and now finally, mr. president, a word about the difficulties there are in terms of the dutch ratification of the agreement with ukraine. i'd like to take this opportunity to appeal to the politicians of the netherlands to understand the magnitude of

this problem. it would be useful to achieve internal domestic political agreement in the netherlands on this issue. thank you, mr. president. [ applause ] >> translator: thank you, president of the commission. i'd like now to open the debate. the first speaker on behalf of bpp. >> translator: president, colleagues, i had a look at the european treaty to see what the task of the european council is. the task of the council is to decide on the strategic direction of the european union, to give some orientation of the continent. if i look at the headlines of the last few days, i must say that doesn't seem to fit because the council seems to be creating more confusion than orientation and that's rather disappointing. let me go through the different topics. first of all, trade policy. one of the challenges, we've got millions of people out of work, particularly young people on

this continent out of work. we want to create jobs, and if we want to do that, we have to create growth. we won't get growth given our demographic developments without more has completed and asian trade agreements. other countries are taking our place. that is the challenge we face. what is the answer? well, we have basically ended up with the canadian negotiators throwing in the towel, threatening to travel away. why have we ended up in this situation? it's something we are responsible for in the european parliament. the last meeting in july, the majority said we need a mixed agreement and not anything else. what are we going to learn for the future? this is all disappointing. topics have to be in the

european parliament and nowhere else. what else have we learned? we have learned that we have to stand-up and defend satyr. i want to appeal to the socialists. when i see the austrian chancellors efforts to respond to the canadians, i think we need to work together to resolve these problems. i would like to expressly support the commissions attempt to get more trade defense and better fair trade as well as free trade. on russia, we have challenges there, too. they consider war is a legitimate political goal. there are hundreds dying every day at aleppo. the counsel was supposed to answer this but it's been a very weak response. we have been discounting the

possibilities of using instruments we should use or at least not to eliminate from the outside. we have instruments that are elements of a gas provision and other aspects we could use. it seems that's the only language that putin understands. that's the language of strength. i would like to see more strength from the european council. >> the only positive thing i have to say was probably the statement from teresa may? why? because she shows now to the european public what it means to leave the european union. people see all of europe, how big great britain is already. people see that scotland and thinking about leaving great britain. scottish prime minister is rethinking a new referendum. he is rethinking a new

referendum in great britain and we have, in the leading body an ongoing battle between them and nobody know the outcome. the country is splitted. three thresa may says -- they recognize what it means ladies and gentlemen. here in the european parliament, we saw in the last week, what it means. they showed us the true face. one member punching another key member to hospital. and still, ladies and gentlemen. >> order. >> ladies and gentlemen. ladies and gentlemen.

>> translator: if you just let mr. webber finish and if you listen to what he has to say, i will give dwrou opportune toy make a point of order afterwards. >> the rules are quite clear -- the rules do not provide for you to shed speakers. in this house, we have rules. if you want to call a member of this house a disgrace, i suggest you start by thinking and looking carefully at your own behavior here, sir. [ applause ] please continue. >> i want to say it is a referendum fleeing from responsibility in parts of the troop are behaving as rough yans. that is the reality of this

house. ladies and gentlemen -- >> translator: to conclude my remarks, satyr, well, the commission put forward a very good result. we in the european parliament will be able to get a majority behind satyr and implement it. unfortunately, we have the european council in the state of confusion. it is important for us to defend our citizens in a globalized world. the commission brought forward very good proposals. in the european parliament, we are capable of getting support for these. it's the member states we have a problem, we have blockades and splits and on migration, the simple situation. we have demetrius here.

we can get good majorities behind the proposal. it's the council that can't stop squabbling. it's not a question of lack of it here, it's a question of unity. europe needs unity, decisiveness and leadership. that's what we would like to ask from you, council. thank you. >> everyone, there are -- >> translator: mr. vapor, the honorable member wants to put a question ahead. >> it is regrettable they fronted up against each other. there is no evidence that anybody was punched at all. i do want that put on the record. however, however, if you would like to come outside with me -- [ laughter ] >> -- we could have a civilized conversation over a cup of coffee, thank you.

[ applause ] >> translator: i have seen the pictures of your colleague lying on the floor. i don't know if you saw those pictures. i saw them. i was shocked when i saw that. those kind of actions of a democratic parliament as a result of internal party disputes. i keep hearing more and more reports from great bit tan about eu citizens and more attacks as distrust thanks to your policy. that's why we are going to struggle to the last for the policies you stand for, sir. [ applause ] >> translator: you want to speak on the rules.

>> thank you mr. president. i would like to thank the calm and measured sense, there's an investigation going on into the events mr. weber made accusations about, not only internal, but a parliamentary one where one of your colleagues is investigating this. one of our colleagues. what he said is prejudice to the investigation is outrageous and i suggest you use the rules, please do something about this. this is unacceptable. [ applause ] >> translator: i'm not sure if you are in the house at the beginning of the meeting, but i actually announced that following those events, i have referred the matter to the code of conduct. the advisory committee. the advisory committee examines the case very carefully and

revised me to refer to the public prosecutor. medical examinations carried out after his admission to hospital. suggest that when he collapsed on the bridge in the house, that followed a blow to his head. that stems from medical report. i have taken note of mr. wolf's allegations and there is a clear suspicion that he was subjected to an act of violence, which is why we referred the matter to prosecutors. i have no doubts about the allegations personally. if next speaker is on behalf of the socialist group. >> translator: thank you, president. i would like to welcome the president's -- the fact is,

members of the european council seem to have forgotten what our president once said, he said, if you want to ride a bike, you have to pedal and if you don't pedal, you end up flat on your face. that's rather like europe. if we want to continue moving forward, we have to pedal. if the european council forgets to pedal, it falls flat on its face. we had a timely reminder of this after the most recent summit, when we talked about syria, the european president reiterated the pressing cause for stepping up to humanitarian aid. n nothing is being done. we called for sanctions as well. we need some kind of instrument to bring this to an end. it's important to commend made

by certain countries. they are welcoming thousands and thousands and thousands of refugees. we also welcome the role of the european borders force, which you talked about. however, the silence of the council on these matters is deafening from december to brussels. the council continues to talk about extending the european investment. what is there to talk about? we want you to adopt it. we want you to extend the plan and step up the european investment plan. it's not enough just to talk about relocation. this double set of standards on the right fails to convince me we have plenty while remaining silent when it comes to forcing the mood. we have to ensure that all those

people who have been calling for some clarification on these issues. we have to remember that we are talking here about the most progressive trade agreement we signed yet. while there is not a condemnation of the satyr agreement, there is a request for clarification. you are aware of the situation and they stressed we have to continue working on this so as to move towards a good and balanced solution. as far as immigration is concerned, we have to bring an end to this attitude. that's of no help to anybody if we are to help europe find a common, joint solution to this enormous problem. i would like to wind up by

saying the european parliament has to speak out loud, but in a united way. we have to speak loud to cause for equitable trade agreements to denounce the crisis. we have to cry out for a more growth orr yen at a timed industrial policy. men and women have to shout out for dignity for the people of europe and institutions. we have to have the courage to stand-up. we have to try to put a smile on the face of our children. there's hope for a better future. that's the european parliament we should believe in and all be trying to build. [ applause ] >> translator: the ecr group will speak now. >> thank you. if ever there was a theme for a summit meeting, then surely the theme of this one was, gridlock. powerless to move or commit to

decision on some of the key issues facing the west and the eu right now. at a time when voters in all countries are asking questions of their leaders. the eu has been defined in the past week by weakness and indecision. why we should ask ourselves why is it so difficult to unite on these key issues. why is a trade agreement like cedar, fail a last hurdle. the ecr group is asking if the eu cannot reach an agreement with a country such as canada, a country with similar environmental and labor standards, what hope do we have to turn the rest of the world that the eu is open for business? and why could the 28 leaders not make progress? because there's a fundamental disconnect between eu leaders and the people they represent. individuals and communities feel weakened. here, we use the language of compromise, coalitions and

semesters. but people outside want to know, will they have more money in their packet. will they be able to pay their bills? will the business they work for grow and create jobs? all too often, these simple questions go unanswered. if leaders fail to address these concerns, if leaders fail to listen to the warnings, if leaders fail to make the case for the decision is taken, then don't be surprised if voters in many of our countries turn to extremist parties, offering simplistic solutions. i realize our country's have different histories. perhaps different interests when dealing with russia. responding to russia's actions is something which should unite us rather than divide us. when we see continued violations by russia and ukraine and georgia, when we see the bombing of aleppo and its people and

russia biting at the heels of the external border, the west should be uniting together and wanting to use what power we have. the eu only has soft power. surely soft power should be better than no power. economic sanctions are beginning to have an effect on russia. not nearly enough, yet, even at this point, leaders could not agree to go further. now we see one eu country, spain, offering to refuel that same russian fleet that is likely to inflict more atrocities on civilians of aleppo. what kind of signal does that send about our resolve? at this rate, we are facing a future of the lowest common denominator politics. we needed a summit of action. we needed a summit of clarity. we needed a summit of decisi decisivene decisiveness. yet, again, this is not what we got. it is time to open our eyes and see what is happening around us.

just as each action has its consequences, inaction also has consequences. prime minister walking away from a canada eu trade deal to create jobs and growth. putin walking to other countries unchecked and uninhibited. if this is a result of our inaction, don't be surprised if our electorates punish us. to regain the confidence of the people that vote for us, we need solutions, actions and a new direction to break the gridlock that we currently face. [ applause ] >> translator: there's a question for you. would you mind answering? go ahead.

thank you very much, mr. president. you are a great auritor but give us few answers. you say there is no weak reaction to russia. should council have imposed sanctions? what should it have done? it condemned very robustly the bombing of aleppo. please, give us some answers. >> well, thank you very much for the compliment. i'll take any compliment i get in this place. it is quite clear. the answer was in your question, you asked should they impose sanctions? the answer is a clear yes. sanctions haven't begun yet. they are starting to work and actually we should not let up. we should have imposed more sanctions and looking at whatever instruments we have. other speakers said that this morning and actually, we know we are not alone if we show true unity in the west, we have to

use what instruments we have and we can use sanctions. thank you. >> translator: now, on behalf of the liberals and democrats. >> yes, thank you, chair. there seems to be a recuring theme in the interventions. that is the inability of the council to take any kind of decision. i'll come back to that. first of -- if more time is needed, it is needed. it's the result that matters. we cannot unpick the work that has been done. trade is essential for our prosperity. the credibility has been severely damaged. the winners of this episode are not the farmers or the entrepreneurs. the winners are china, russia and other countries because they

get to set the standards, not europe. now, some parties in this house are actually welcoming it because they are against satyr. welcoming a veto will boomerang. tomorrow, the veto will be used against your priorities. the satyr episode exposes a bigger problem. as i said, the weakness of the council. colleagues, mr. tusk, the eu cannot continue like this. if we look at the list of topics on the table, sanctions blocked, the ukraine agreement jeopardized. satyr blocked. decision on article 50, the eu has been kept dangling nine months. now they are threatening to veto budget. we cannot continue like this. the eu is like a three engine

plane with one engine broken down. it's still flying as the other two engines are working. it cannot stay on course until the council engine is fixed. mr. tusk, please ensure that the european union will not undergo the same fate as poland in the 18th century as they were completely paralyzed by the veto. allowing every nobleman to block a decision and as a result, parliament did not become greater, it became irreally vanlt. the council has to take responsibility for the european union as a whole and it has to do so soon. because not only will our own citizens tire of the inability of the eu to respond to the challenges of today, but europe is rapidly making itself relevant as a global actor. that has an impact. it has already been mentioned. the victim of the same inability to take decisions are the people in syria. if the eu fails to decide on

sanctions against mr. putin, we lose any leverage we may have to force him to stop the bombing. we need a political transition urgently and that means we have to be able to put pressure on mr. putin. victims are equally the refugee. i'm a bit surprised to hear the council but also the commission to be quite jubilant about the refugee policies when the united nations, yesterday, say 2016 is the deadliest year so far. more people have drown in the mediterranean than any year before. how can you say this is a success? how is it that the council can still look itself in the eyes in the mirror and say this is a success? so, mr. tusk, the council, the member state leaders have a duty to end the paralysis. a duty towards the eu citizens and a duty toward the world.

thank you. [ applause ] >> translator: the united left now will hear from you. >> thank you, chair. we believe for and against all wars. it is right to condemn the attacks and bombings of the syrian regime in russia and east aleppo. but there are no good and bad problems. the bombs that the jihadists and the rebels throw on western aleppo. and the u.s. bombs that kill civilians in syria and iraq are as bad.

so, should need to ignore and k c civilians and children in yemen. and in the same way, you showed tolerance to the israeli bombings that destroyed hospitals in the gaza strip and the u.s. and nato try to change the borders in the middle east through violence. it is also the council responsibility that we are being hypercritical in implementing the inacceptable agreement we had with turkey, which is against international law and creates the conditions for the trafficking refugees. instead of criticizing the government which is becoming more and more, and it trampled the turkish people. it invades syria and it is

perpetrating genocide against the kurds and fighting the minorities and persecuting journalists. we reward them, we recognize it as a safe country to try to avoid the refugees reaching our border. you would like, also, to liberalize the visa regime without turkey having fulfilled the obligation toward the state. these are double standards. this is the result of your policies, which have made the refugee crisis even worse. unfortunately, the commission council insists there should be more front, more controls in our borders. more of a fortress it's your responsibility you close the corridor. this means that now refugees drown near the libyan coast and

not -- we will not face the humanitarian crisis this way. the only increase in phobia, what we need is a refugee policy based on solidarity and humanity. we need legal and safe rules for refugees. we need a fair and binding system. we should stop the wars in the middle east. we should help the countries in africa. the people should notice with their struggles they marginalize and what is clear is the council and the commission try through peter to bring back by the back door.

we welcome the courageous stand who are against the ultimatum. because they have salvaged the decency. they have expressed true will toward millions of eu citizens. thank you. >> translator: a question for you. will you accept? will you accept a question? >> yes, sir. >> translator: go ahead. >> translator: thank you very much, president. if i understood correctly, the united european left -- concerning the war. why, in that case, do you not condemn the destruction of

the -- by the u.s. air force which was never permitted? >> translator: i think i was clear, i don't know if you listened to everything i said. i spoke about u.s. bombings as well. there aren't good bombings. they kill civilians and children who shouldn't just condemn only the bombings in east aleppo which is condemn the jihadi actions and the rebels as well as the u.s. bombings. >> translator: now for the green group. >> translator: thank you very much. indignation, rejection, well, that is what too many of our citizens feel about europe now.

many people in this room are happy to see that. there's a sign of a return to national identity. i don't think that's correct. itis rather an alarm, an alarm as politicians seem to be moving further away from reality. here, we see the situation. one of the most inclusive regions of europe. they have rejected the satyr treaty. that's no accident in my years. it's been the number one subject that got our citizens motivated. the french speaking citizens have looked the details of satyr a way no one has in europe.

they have examined it carefully, serious reserve reservations about this idea that shareholders should have power over our democracies, rather than being a killjoy. it is representing all of our citizen who is reject a trade policy that simply serves the multinationals. it's hard to suggest they are isolated. it's quite the contrary. 500 local authorities of europe declared themselves outside -- and there's a wide rejection of the dispute settlement systems, including the austrians and many other countries. first of all, a denial when it came to the letter sent by the president expressing the concerns of parliament.

then they said, basically, if you haven't agreed with us, it's because you haven't understood. they tried to convince them, then moved to intimidation. then, all patchwork of declarations, doubtful legitimacy and the sense of confusion. the efforts to try to unblock satyr contrasts rather with the attitudes of others. there are concerns about tax evasion and financial regulation but, i think the most flagrant decision made by the european council last week was that, the extreme free trade and extremist again on migration, asking for reform. but, services can circulate freely, but not human beings.

that seems to be the message out of the council. i'll site your words, europe citizens want to know if europe's elites are capable of taking control of events and that go beyond them and terrify them. a few days later, in your state of the union address, you said you wanted a europe that protects european way of life and a europe that gives power to citizens. well, sir, let's measure your worth by your act. here, the french speaking belg belgians are trying to remove the course of removing rights from our citizens. there needs to be a clear decision about which services are public and which ought to be private. now, i think it's very important, also, to refer to

conflicts between the treaty and european justice. will this take time? yes, it will take time. democracy takes time. we have traded with canada for centuries without satyr, so i don't think a few extra months will be so decisive. the rejection should not put an end to europe's trade policy. rather rather, it should give us a way to look at it. we need to ensure it's not just a question of maximizing the flows because that's not necessarily compatible with the environment. it's not simply a question of maximizing profit, rather the objective should be to protect us, tax standards, environmental standards, social standards to the highest possible level. these are the standards that have to form the framework for free trade to develop. trade policy can never be

decided upon in secret. quite the contrary. we need full transparency and full scrutiny by citizens for trade agreements. that is the only way to regain the trust of our citizens. notice, satyr is a yes to european citizens. thank you. >> translator: thank you mr. lamber lamberts. there's a flood of blue cards in response to your speech. you want to choose who p puts a question? you have the floor, madam >> translator: thank you. mr. lamberts, what you seem to be trying to say is you are not alone with resistance, however, 27 other countries did give their agreement. they said yes, we want to trade with canada. even if satyr is necessary.

i would like to invite you to one of our neighbors very much in favor because trade barriers disappear. perhaps you don't need that where you are but we, in flanders want to open up trade. a good example sent by the commissioner a few years ago. mr. lamberts, you seem to be suggest ting this note is a cal to europe. i call on you to recognize the fact that it might have been an historical mistake to go with this approach for that treaty. >> why is this is only institute to say no? well, 27 other member states, plus flanders say yes. my answer to you is very simple. in europe, there are two parliaments. they have probably discussed

satyr. the other did not do it. i'm thinking the french national assembly. so, that is basically government's going over the heads of what the citizens want. >> translator: we'll see, mr. lamberts. >> translator: a little calm in the chamber, please. >> translator: order, please. we'll have to see what the national parliaments did deal with satyr have to say about what you said. we are going to heard from the efdd group. >> mr. smith goes to brussels and you give her five minutes to speak at 1:00 in the morning.

it's the treatment david cameron got. at least this time the french president didn't leave the table to go to the bathroom. when asked by british journalists how the negotiations were going, he shrugs very well. the impression is you are simply too busy to even discuss brexit or take it seriously. basically, you're hoping we'll change our minds. mr. tusk alluded to that a couple months ago. i know there's a large tradition here, whether it's with denmark, or france or ireland or the netherlands. the democratic referendum, you try to ignore it or overturn. today, we had mr. juncker urging the dutch government to ignore the result on ukraine. frankly, it's a disgrace. it's worse that it is supported by people in the british

parliament. they are desperate to beat britain inside this awful, single market. i'm sorry, it simply isn't going to happen. 17.4 million people who could not have been clearer. we voted to say we want our country back. in the end, that is what is going to happen. i have to confess, though, mrs. mays position, in her five minutes was somewhat curious for her to argue that britain must have a full vote and a full say in all of the affairs up until the time we leave is a very mixed message. i have seen already this morning, some take it as as sign of weakness. we need to get on with it. every single day that goes by is a lost opportunity. you only have to see after seven years of negotiation, the proposed trade agreement with canada, having been vetoed absolutely proves in modern 21st

century global economy simply isn't fit for purpose. i want us to get on with it. this club is very expensive. we are paying in net, 30 million pounds every day. some argue it is a bit less. some argue it is a bit more. either way, it is too much. we are hoping to finance this monthly traveling sicircus to strausburg. up to 5% on your regulations, up to 5% of employees, every year, are allowed to retire five years early and receive full pay and entitlements for five years for doing absolutely nothing. i mean no one in the world would allow this sort of thing to go on. so, i want us to get on with it. interestingly, i met a large number of skandinavian businesses the other day. they are worried. they are anxious. why?

because they know the united kingdom is the eurozone's biggest market. they know the eu has several deals that involves no free movement with people. if we can do a deal like that with mexico, why not with the most important trading global partner? that is common sense coming from european businesses. common sense, i think, coming from most people in the united kingdom. the only obstacle is the high priests in this room today. if you think by delaying brexit, if you think by stopping brexit, you are going to help your own businesses, your own industries, you are wrong. it's in the mutual interest of all of us to get on with this and conclude a sensible, straight forward, tariff-free deal. [ applause ]

>> translator: may i ask you something? did you refer to mrs. clegg as quizlings? >> we did. yes. >> translator: i suggest like to point out that he was the leader of the nazi collaborators in norway. i think it is inappropriate to compare democratically e lekted politicians with such an individual. [ applause ] >> i'm not allowed to answer. isn't it lovely. he did it against the interest and the will of his own people. the point i'm pmaking is they ae refusing to accept a democratic result as mr. juncker is

refusing to accept the dutch referendum. there is something fundamentally wrong here. [ applause ] >> translator: at least those gentlemen did not feed their e welco electorate with false figures as you did. white house coverage continues as both major party candidates are on campaign trails. live at 8:00 p.m. eastern with donald trump and mike pence in the battleground state of wisconsin. they are appears in o claire. soo that on c-span. 45 minutes later, democrat, hillary clinton in florida. see her remarks at 8:45 eastern on c-span 2. on election day, november 8, the nation decides the next president and which party

controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage including cam spain stops with hillary clinton, donald trump and surrogates. follow senate races with coverage of their debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily. this week on c-span 2, political radio programs with talk show hosts. wednesday, live from washington, d.c., hugh hewitt is live. live thursday from noon to 3:00, author and progressive radio host, thom hartman and friday from 9:00 to noon, the mike gallagher show live in new york city. all this week, live on c-span 2. u.s. attorney general, lor

rhetty lynch delivers keynote between law enforcement and students at black colleges and universities conference. she urges hcbu to lead the effort and build trust among communities. this is about 25 minutes. [ applause ] good morning, good morning. welcome to day two of the national hbcu conference. how has the conference been so far? wonderful. this morning, i have the honor of introducing the attorney general of the united states, loretta lynch. we can think of no better person to frame our education justice discussion this morning. to members of congress, she said that the divide between law enforcement and the communities they serve is the issue of the

day facing our nation. by recognizing our common humanity, our common laws and our common goals, we can, in fact, work on this difficult problem. we could not agree more. as the daughter of a retired minister, and a librarian, attorney general lynch says their commitment to justice and public service shaped her interest in this work. a graduate of harvard law school, she joined the united states attorney's office for the eastern district of new york in the '90s. there, she forged an impressive career prosecuting cases involving violent crimes, public corruption and civil rights. she is an advocate for justice and a defender of civil rights, as you know. as attorney general of the united states, she has been a steady voice for justice in some very tough times in our country.

from the charleston church shootings to the shootings of citizens at the hands of police, to the shootings of police at the hands of citizens, and the orlando nightclub shooting as well, she has been there, calling for calm and bringing us together. in times of unrest, our attorney general noted, we must reject the easy impulses of bitterness and rancor and embrace the difficult work of finding a path forward together. today, as we continue the conversations many of you are having on your campuses and in your communities, we are honored to welcome to our hbcu national conference, our attorney general, loretta lynch. [ applause ]

>> good morning, everyone. >> good morning. >> there we go. how are we doing? how is the conference? how are the hbcus. yeah! that's what i want to hear, what's what i want to hear. thank you so much for having me. thank you, doctor kim hunter-reed for that gracious introduction. thank you also for your work, your leadership of the white house initiative on hcbus. something that should be at the white house because it is vital to the life blood of all of our communities. let me thank the department of education and secretary king for helping to host this conference. we have some tremendous panelists here. i think you are going to hear from some of them later on today. my colleague, nancy rodriguez, who directs the national institute of justice and calvin hudnet, d.o.j. special adviser for campus security. i want to thank all of you, all

of the hbcu leaders, faculty, students, consultants, those of you who care about what is in my opinion, one of our national treasures. thank you for being here today and working on this issue. [ applause ] >> when i look at you, i see the life blood, the life blood of our nation's hbcus. together, you are writing a new chapter in this proud legacy of service, of enrichment and empowerment, not only for african-americans but for all americans. this country is better and stronger because of you. now, as everybody here knows, hbcus have long been instrumental in this nation's rather halting progress toward equality for all. you have been the backbone of a rising economic and educational tie for african-americans since before the civil war. people don't think about that

but this has been part of american history. you have trained our leaders like due voice and thurgood marshall, martin luther king jr. and ella baker. during the civil rights movement of the '50s and '60s, it was the hbcu students that led the way. from the effort of the student nonviolent coordinating committee, that group is close to my heart. it was founded at my parents alma mater, shaw university in raleigh, north carolina. yes, i am a shaw baby. my parents met and married there and made the friends of their lifetime and learned and got the grounding that would support not just them but our entire family for so many generations. we all remember the lunch counter sit-ins of the '60s, when four young men from north carolina a&t, walk into that segregated woolworths in

greensboro, the city of my birth and asked to be treated like anybody else. this has been the story of hbcu courage and dedication and commitment over the years. it sounds like a simple ask, right? all you want to do is to be treated like everybody else but as we all know it is as complicated as the history of this country. the greensboro four, we know, were met with scorn and derision but they persisted with courage and dignity. i know some of you have had the opportunity to visit our most wonder new museum, the smithsonian museum of african-american history and culture where one of the stools they sat on is on display. you have to see it. it is just one but it is in there in the educational section. i was able to visit it the other day.

it holds a particular significance for me, not just because i was born in greensboro the year before the sit ins, and not just because my father, a young minister, allowed the student young activists to meet in the basement of his church, providence baptist church and not because of this audacious for its time act of civil disobedience, changed literally the very neighborhoods and the schools that i grew up in. when i look at that stool, they are enshrined in one of the most wonderful places on the mall, what it says to me, what it illustrates for me, is what the hbcus have always given us, the ordinary individual's ability to change the world. to strike a blow for justice. in a democracy such as ours, a young college student can and should have as much power as a

well known senator. you don't have to have a name or a title to make a difference. all you have to have is a commitment to an ideal. that's what hbcus have given us for so many years. these are the lessons of our hcbus. we saw those students risk their lives for the causes they believe in. my father carried me so i could see what was happening and what was possible by young people not much older than me. certainly, i know he looked on them as almost too young to be involved in that fray. it is also the case that our students are our leaders. they are the one who is refuse to accept the indignity, who refuse the accept the disparate

treatment, who don't see a point in waiting for things to slowly get better and insist on change. that's what's happening today. the same lessons of the hbcu of 50 years ago are the ones that we have to rely on today. [ applause ] >> that spirit is what we need today. the dedication and commitment and the ability to hurl yourself into the fray armed with just nothing more than the knowledge that you're right. that's been the training of our hbcu's. that's what the young people have done and now we have young people that are confronting the challenge of our own time. the issue of today. what i feel is one of the most important issues facing the nation now and that's the relationship between law enforcement and the communities that we serve especially our communities of color. this is the issue of today.

not only is it defining interactions between people and law enforcement, it's influencing how people feel about government rit large. the relationship of the overall government to our citizens. this issue -- this issue of the defrayed relationship and distrust that we see and the pain that we see, quite frankly, this issue is as old as our country, but as recent as the evening news. that's where we see it. you know we have seen it because the pain of the minority community is especially captured in what we're seeing today. i know it's hard to look at a lot of these things the viral videos of lost lives are painful to watch and painful to see. they underscore this issue like nothing really has and they have actually allowed us to move

beyond the denials of the past or simply the inability to understand someone else's experience that we have also seen in the past. to have a discussion about what so many people in the minority people have been talking about for generations. we know the denial and people that don't have the similar experience and say i don't think that it's that bad. you must have misunderstood. no, i don't believe anybody would do that. so, as painful as today's environment is, it's allowed us to to move past that stage and to to bring the minority experience in the forefront like a time that we have not seen since 50 years ago in that civil rights movement when the television cameras showed the young people in the streets. showed the young people being

met with the dogs and hoses and showed our young people, our hbcu students fighting for our rights and standing up for their rights and illustrated the star treatment in the government's -- stark reality in the government's community as black and white citizens. as painful as the images are, they have allowed us to have important conversations with community members and with law enforcement. they have allowed us to talk about these issues and talk about how to change them and to start the difficult process of bringing about real change. these conversations reveal at the end of the day no matter who we are, no matter what we look like, we all want the same thing. we want to be understood as people. not as stereotypes. as individual human beings that had hopes and dreams that want to live lives of dignity and

purpose and raise your children for the safety and security, we all want the same thing. we have been able to move to that discussion, but where do we take it? first we hold on to the common bond. we hold on to what we have discovered out of the pain because whether the loss of life has been civilian or law enforcement, there's a family grieving. there are children without parents. there's spouses that have to pick up the pieces and move on. out of the common bond, we can move forward. one of my personal heros is the late great barbara jordan. also hbcu. one of the things that's struck me the most and one of my favorite quotes when she says are we to be one people bound together by common spirit sharing in a common endeavor or will we become a divided nation?

well, i know the answer. we made that choice. we made that choice 200 years ago. we made it 150 years, we made it 50 years ago to come together to call on this nation to live up to its promise to all of its citizens so that we, in fact, can share in that common endeavor. this is the work of our time, and all of us have a responsibility to help carry that effort forward. that's why when i became the attorney general, i made rebuilding the trust between communities and law enforcement one of the top priorities. one of the top things i was going to work on. we have worked on that in the department in a number of ways. i have done a 12 city tour and we have convened a series of regional justice forums and we have continued the justice department's efforts to give law enforcement agencies the tools

and the training equipment they need to serve their communities fairly and effectively. these are important efforts and the department of justice is committed to them. ultimately as we have seen through our history, change comes from the community. change comes from our young people. change comes through all of you. and here is where hbcu is uniquely poised to play, not just a pivotal, but a leadership role in this effort. we need you to do this now. you're the thought leader of today. you are the think tanks of the community. you have the best and brightest students, but you also see these issues and see the consequences of ignoring them. you know -- you know in particular that an educational institution for those of color is preparing them to move into a world that's going to change

everyday and a world that's going to grow and thrive and lead. the young people are leading. they're out there marching in the streets and working on the issues. they're also focussing on the . they're also focusing on the issue. a few weeks ago is with at howard university for a forum, outstanding forum put together by the university. and the purpose of the forum was to bring police officers and young people together, to have the kind of honest discussions that we have to have. to come and to have the kind of understanding of each other's positions and goals and desires that we have to have, to learn so that we can have the mutual respect that we have to have. that we all have to have. and they discussed everything, from how young people perceived law enforcement to also the role that young people, particularly young people of color can play

in diversifying and building the law enforcement agencies of the 21st century. because the people that protect the community have to come from the community. the people that protect and honor the community have to be of that community. they have to understand that community. in fact, it's our responsibility to protect our community. and it was a tremendous gathering. there were tough conversations. there were honest conversations, but there were respectful conversation. it highlighted for me the hbcu's unique ability to convene the stakeholders in this discussion. you can pull them together, to forge the innovative coalitions. you have the connections to bring these groups together and also to drive a meaningful and productive discussion about the steps that we have to take together. we have to take them together to ensure that we not only do not lose the progress of the last

eight years and the last 50 years, but build on it to a better and brighter future for all of us. and that forum, to me, represents exactly the kind of work that i know hbcus are doing throughout the nation. i know they are working on these issues and they are the leaders in this field because this is what they've been doing throughout history. it's what all of you have done ever since cheney was founded, ever since lincoln was founded, ever since reconstruction and so many other great schools came into being. and ever since my parents walked into shaw and even beyond. and that's what we need you to do today. it's the challenge that i issue to you, is to pick up this mantle. pick up this conversation, to have these discussions. you provide a safe space for courageous conversations.

you use your stature. you use your clout. you use your alumni network to champion so many issues and i need you to champion this one, too. i need you to be the voice of thought and leaders on this issue, because this is our issue. it is the issue of our time. and you are training the activists and leaders of tomorrow. your students are going to be leading this fight. they already are. and i tell you, the conscience of this nation cannot rest until all americans feel not only respected but protected by our laws. [ applause ] so i've been a prosecutor for over 20 years and i will tell you that how we handle our system of laws tells people what we value in this society, whom

we value in this society and what we think is important. and if we are not involved in shaping that discussion, shaping those laws and shaping those thoughts, others will tell that story for us. and that has never worked out. that has not been the way in which we have moved forward. we have moved forward by grabbing the opportunity. we've moved forward by seizing the moment. we've moved forward by harnessing the power of the community of thought and learning of our hbcus and making the changes in this country that all americans have benefited from. and that's what the issue of community and police relations is about for me. are we going to be content as long as so many of our family members, our friends, our fellow americans feel that the law works not for them but against them? can we rest while anybody has

that feeling? can we sit back while our young people struggle under that burden? can we not engage? we cannot afford to do so. and we face that question so many times before, on every issue of the day. on the important issues, in fact, that have move this had country forward. it has come to this community to decide how we will take a stand and every time we have given the same answer. we'll be there. was the answer given by the two famu students who began that busboy cot in tallahassee in 1956. it's the same answer given by the four students at that lunch counter that i urge you to go and see. and it was the same answer given by that young fisk graduate, john lewis, when he led that march across the bridge named for hatred.

he turned it into a bridge of peace. every time the answer is, we will be there. and hbcus, i need you to be there now. i need you to be there in this issue. i need you to be there for our young people. i need you to be there in this time because we will not be satisfied, we cannot be satisfied until the promise of this country, the promise of liberty, the promise of equality is made real. not just real but felt for everyone in this country. i know in so many areas, in so many ways this is called preaching to the choir. you're already working on this. i know that this is your mission, this is your calling. i want to thank you all. students, faculty, administrators alike, for your contributions to this work.

i want to thank you for realizing that the struggles of yesterday give us the strength to move on for the fight of today. i urge you to find a voice for justice in our society. not just in our campuses, but in the world beyond, the world that we have always prepared young people to attend. the world that hbcus have always been the backbone of preparation, of courage and commitment and dedication. and let me pledge to you also, as the attorney general of these united states, that as you continue that sacred work, that this department of justice will always stand with you and stand by you and support you as you take up the leading causes of today. thank you so much for your work, for your time, for your

dedication but, most of all, thank you for supporting the education and advancement of our national treasures, our young people. thank you so very much. [ applause ] thank you all. thank you. >> we'll be live at 8:00 pm eastern in the wisconsin in the city of eau claire. see that on c-span. 45 minutes later hillary clinton is campaigning in florida. see her remarks on 8:45 on c-span 2. >> on election day, november 8th, the nation decides our next

president and which party controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage of the presidential race including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump and their surrogates and follow key house and senate races with our coverage of their candidate debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily. >> on wednesday, live from washington, d.c. conservative radio talk show host hugh hewitt is live from 6:00 to 9:00 am eastern. live thursday from noon to three, tom hartman and on friday from 9:00 am till noon, political perspective on the mike gallagher show live from new york city. all this week live on c-span 2. >> c-span, where history unfolds

daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's capable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. now on a special weeknight edition of american history tv, a look at african-american history. first the discussion about the decision to put abolitionist harriet tubman on the $20 bill. later, a look at preserving african-american sites. in april, treasure secretary jack lew announced that harriet tubman would be on the front of a newly designed $20 bill. the association for the study of african-american life and history. this is an hour and 45 minutes.