house of representatives and has done the same thing in the united states senate. so that would be -- it would appear that there's a bit of a mixed message there. and i think part of the optimism around mr. candor's campaign was around the idea that he could benefit from the same kind of anti-incumbent energy that was obviously propelling mr. trump's campaign. but that's not the way it turned out. it turned out that people apparently -- look carefully at the results. it certainly looks like you got a situation where people were motivated by their party identification and the party identification of the candidates more so than they were this sort of outsider anti-establishment energy. so i think that's what's -- i think in some ways that is a pretty good illustration of the

complexity of discerning the motivation of voters across the country. but, listen, voters sent an important message. and it's important for people who are going to serve in the next administration and people who are going to serve in the next congress, in the house and senate, to spend time thinking about what that message was. because it was a forceful one. the american people are going to be expecting results. and what those results are is something that representatives in both parties are going to have to spend some time thinking about. margaret? >> josh -- working this so hard. i know you can't read sentiment this early on, truly and discern what the message was. but can youed aleast say why you think the white house's own internal predictions were so

wrong? >> listen, it's not just our read of this that was wrong. just about every public poll we saw was wrong. you will check me on this because you follow this more closely than i did. i'm not aware that either candidate campaigned in wisconsin. i think that's a clear indication that everybody, including both candidates, expected second clinton to win wisconsin. and she didn't. it's not close enough that anybody is calling for a recount. it is clear that nobody got the outcome that they expected last night. now, does that mean that the polling industry has been officially disrupted or that political consultants are going to have to change the way they do business? maybe. and that will be something interesting for them to consider

over the next couple of years. i think it's just hard to tell exactly what the message was. as i referred to -- what the message from voters is. as i mentioned earlier, there are a substantial number of voters that voted for barack obama twice and then voted for donald trump yesterday. and given the vigorous opposition that president-elect trump professed to have for the obama agenda, it raises a lot of questions about why those voters supported him. and the answer to that is not obvious to me. maybe it is to somebody else. i suspect that political analysts and academics and political professionals, you know, are going to spend days and weeks and months and maybe even years digging into these results and trying to get greater clarity about -- to explain the outcome. >> does this in some way -- the

president -- you talked about some of the rhetoric he used. he used very stark terms saying the very future of the republican -- it was a defense of american values. really laying the stakes in very stark terms. does he still believe that today, that the viability of the america he believes this country is is at stake? >> listen, as i mentioned earlier, the argument that the president was making on the campaign trail was an authentic one. he was making an argument that he deeply believes about the direction that he would like to see the country go. >> he doesn't believe democracy is at risk? the future of the republic, that's -- he said that repeatedly in north carolina and elsewhere. >> the president made a forceful argument. he stands by that argument.

the time for making that argument is past. the american people rendered their judgment. president obama doesn't get to choose his successor. the american people do. they did. they didn't choose the person that president obama supported. now the responsibility that president obama has is to turn his attention to prioritizing a smooth transition with his successor and ensuring a peaceful transition of power. but frankly, the president's aspirations are higher than a peaceful transition of power. he wants to make sure we have an effective transition to give the next president an opportunity to get a running start. now that the election is over, it's a good time to remember that we're americans first and all of us are rooting for the success of president trump as he assumes the awesome responsibility of trying to unite and lead this country. >> can you tell us any -- who

informed the president or how he spent his evening? >> the president was monitoring returns from the residence last night. i don't have a lot of details to share from there. obviously, he relied on staff to help coordinate the calls to secretary clinton and president-elect trump respectively. he stayed up late in order do that. he wasn't able to reach president-elect trump until after president-elect trump delivered his remarks last night. it was rather late. but obviously, we had to work through staff in order to make that happen. >> the president, if he goes on this trip as you said, you said the schedule is not changing, how is he going to explain to allies what happened? the president on mostly all of his recent foreign trips has basically said he is confident hillary clinton is going to win.

none of which has transpired is going to happen. what is his message going to be? we seem to be redirecting what was going to be a farewell visit. >> listen, the president spent a lot of time on his foreign travels over the last 12 to 18 months, offering reassurance to our partners and allies around the world about the state of the political debate in this country and the likely outcome of the election. now that we have an outcome of the election, i think the president will continue to offer reassurance to our closest allies and partners about the steadfast commitment of the united states to the kinds of alliances and partnerships that advance our interests and keep our country safe. many of our strongest alliances are alliances that have been fortified by democratic and republican presidents. president obama obviously invested a lot of his own type

and attention to prioritizing investments in many of those alliances, particularly in the asia pacific. president-elect trump will chart a foreign policy path that he believes is in america's best interest. he will do so after getting the benefit of briefings from president obama and from the national security experts in the obama administration that have been implementing that policy and implementing that strategy. i think the reassurance that president obama can offer to a lot of our allies is that traditionally, and for generations in some cases, our alliances have transcended individual presidents and individual political parties in part because some of our alliances are rooted in the deep cultural ties between our two countries. ultimately, it's going to be up to the president-elect to decide. okay? carol.

>> back to the president's rhetoric during the campaign. you are saying that his comments about donald trump being unfit to be president of the united states, he shouldn't have the nuclear codes, he is a national security threat to the united states if he was elected, you are basically saying the president still agrees with all of that but the voters have spoken so the sun came up and everybody should move on? >> well, look, i think what the president is said in the rose garden is our success of our democracy demands that the president put aside his own personal political views and his own preferences as he transitions out of office. the president doesn't choose his successor. the american people do. they have spoken. >> a lot of people took what he said very seriously. and, therefore, voted for hillary clinton based on some of

these things that he said. they're nervous, anxious. what does he say to them? >> he says to them that our -- the institutions of our democracy have been in place for 240 years. and our democracy has been buffeted by great challenge. some of which originated inside the united states. some of those challenges originated overseas. but by relying on our institutions and democratic traditions, demonstrating a faithful commitment to the will of the american people, our democracy hasn't just survived, it has thrived. the president places great faith in the american people and in our longstanding democratic traditions and institutions. he places great faith in the people who make up those institutions, whether that's the united states military, our men and women in law enforcement,

the millions of american patriots that are civil servants that serve in our federal government. he also places a great confidence in those americans who don't work in government but are committed to moving this country forward. and that was the reference he made in the rose garden to teachers that are responsible for educating the next generation of americans. they don't get a lot of glory. they don't get big paychecks. they are critical to the success of our country and our country's future strength. the same would apply to nurses across the country. they don't get the glory. but they are doing the quiet work of striving to perfect our union. >> on tomorrow's meeting, do you is melania trump coming to meet with the first lady as is tradition? do you have any sense of what time this meeting will happen? >> i'm not aware of mrs. trump's

travel plans. you will have to check with her team. >> do you have a sense of time? >> i don't have a sense of time yet. we will try to pin that down before the end of the day so you can plan your day tomorrow. mark. >> josh, if the president puts aside the harsh criticism that he levelled against trump during the campaign and welcomes him tomorrow, doesn't it put the meeting under an air of insinceri insincerity, bearing in mind what was said about him, what carol said, the unfit and unqualified to be president and commander in chief? >> no, to be blunt. the president is quite sincere about fulfilling the basic responsibility that he has to the american people and our democracy to ensure a smooth transition to the next presidency. at the same time, mark, the

president has no inclination to paper over theex

president-elect trump is going to make the decisions that are consistent with his own policy views. when he becomes president of the united states. and there's a strong chance that the president is go -- president obama is going to disagree with some of those decisions. but the success of our democracy depends on everybody -- every single citizen, including the president of the united states, setting aside their partisan affiliation, setting aside their political preferences and rooting for the success of the american president as that person seeks to unite the country and move us forward. so i'm not saying it's going we were in the depth of the worst economic crisis since the great depression. and his ability to mobilize an effective response that has spawned an historically strong recovery depended on him getting a running start. and that running start was only possible because of the commitment of president bush and his team to this same principle of a smooth and effective transition. so president obama has experienced firsthand how a president benefits from the

incumbent president devoting the time and energy that's necessary to help an incoming president get off to a running start. president obama is genuinely rooting for president-elect trump to succeed in uniting the country and helping this country make additional progreg. that's a sincerely held view. >> kidespite what you said at t start, might you want to respond or comment on what speaker ryan said that the election was a repudiation of the liberal policies of this president? >> i think there will be plenty of time to respond to statements like that in the days ahead. in the spirit of today, we will set that aside. we can talk tomorrow. i've got some thoughts. michele. >> what do you say about how much of the returns the president watched? was he up all night?

who was he watching with? was he with his family and staff? what can you say about his reaction? during the campaign, he said that there was no comparison between the candidates, there wasn't a choice. but this is the choice that was made. surely, he must have been stunned at some point. >> president obama did stay up late. it was not until after mr. trump -- president-elect trump completed his remarks last night that president obama was able to reach him on the telephone. so i know it was at least 3:30 or 4:00 before president obama was able to turn in. suspect the same is true of all of you. he's not looking for any sympathy. >> was he with staff and family? >> the president was in the residence. i don't know that there was a any -- i don't know that there was any staff with him in person. he was in communication with staff last night. i don't know whether or not members of his family joined him as he was watching the results.

>> his reaction to things going the way they did? >> listen, i think you got a good sense of the president's reaction in the rose garden, which is the candidate that he was supporting didn't win. that's disappointing to him and to the 52 million other people who voted for secretary clinton. >> you are saying that at no point in the night was he surprised or had any other reaction other than an upbeat let's move forward? >> i don't think anybody -- i mean everybody got an outcome that we weren't expecting. that applies to the president, too. >> can you describe anything of his reaction along those lines? i think -- >> look, it wasn't a positive surprise in his mind. he obviously was weighing in in support of secretary clinton. he felt strongly about this race. he made clear that there was a clear choice. but the president knew going into last night that once people started casting ballots on

election day, his responsibility shifted from advocating for his preferred successor to planning for a smooth transition for -- with whomever won the election. so he was mindful from the beginning of his responsibilities to the country and to our democracy. in part because of his own personal experience benefitting from that kind of planning that president obama -- that president bush initiated in 2008. >> do you know at what point he started to think this is really going in the opposite discretion than expected? >> i don't know at which point he reached that conclusion. i think that eventuality dawned on everybody at some point probably relatively late in the evening last night.

>> these comments have been brought up a couple of times now. for both the president and other members of the administration to say during this campaign that the things that donald trump was saying were dangerous, were actually dangerous to national security, and you said just today that there are real concerns. so what are at the top of the president's concerns right now? for somebody to transition to someone that he actually called unfit and dangerous for national security. >> michele, that's the rhetoric that you heard from the president on the campaign trail. that rhetoric reflects the president's views. it certainly reflects his own experience of having served in this job. and it reflects his own unique perspective on who is best qualified to succeed him. but the election is over. the election has been decided. we live in a democracy. that democracy means the president doesn't choose his successor. the american people do. they did. the president's responsibility,

as the outgoing president, is to ensure a smooth and effective transition with the president-elect. and that is now the president's top priority. and that's one that previous presidents have demonstrated. it served our country and our citizens very well. the president's expectation is that a commitment to those principles and to an effective transition will serve the country well. >> you said the time for argument is over. that's right, this is now real. if we are to believe as you said we should the president's concerns that this was a dangerous situation, surely the president must have some real concerns right now. can you describe -- >> there are going to be tough debates in congress about the future of our country. there are going to be tough debates inside the republican

party about the future our country. there are going to be tough debates inside the democratic party about the future of our country. the election is over. you have seen secretary clinton and senator kaine offer up their gracious concession. you heard president obama graciously commit to a smooth transition even with a candidate that he did not support. in fact, one that he vehemently opposed. but that's what our democracy demands. and that is evidence of the durability and strength of our democracy. it will serve the incoming president well. it will serve the incoming congress well. it will serve our allies and partners around the world well. it will serve our economy well. and that's why the president has made this such a priority. >> our democracy also demands that at some rare times,

although most recently -- the winner of the popular vote is not always the president. does that make this more painful for the administration? >> look, i can't speak for everybody. it doesn't to me. everybody knew what the rules were. i think the outcome of the popular vote is an indication that secretary clinton's historic campaign succeeded in mobilizing tens of millions of americans behind her vision and her candidacy. that is a credit to her. president obama i think deserves a little credit for that, too, given how aggressively he campaigned for her and given the kind of agenda that he also laid out.

but, no, that's -- everybody was aware of the fact that the next president is determined based on a count in the electoral college, not a count of the popular vote. >> quickly, also during the campaign he said many statements to the effect of this is not who america is, this is not what we stand for, i believe in the judgment and values of the american people that they will choose the candidate i support and that america is not as divided as people say. does he still believe those things that he said then? >> i think what is true is that the president had an opportunity to convey his very well-known views about the two candidates on the campaign trail many, many times over the last several weeks. but he knew all along that what he was doing is advocating to

the american people trying to convince them to support his preferred candidate. and some 52 million of them did. but not enough to win the electoral vote. and that is our system of democracy. it's not perfect. but it's a system that has served us very well. >> has this changed the president's view of who we are and what america is? if that's the tone he was taking. >> no, i don't want to leave you with that impression. obviously, the president disagrees with the outcome. and his preferred candidate didn't win. but look, what it says about the voters and their motivation and their priorities, again, i think people are going to spend weeks, months, if not years trying to discern what this all means. but at the most basic level what it means is that it means donald

trump is the president-elect of the united states. and the responsibility of the sitting president is to make sure that president-elect trump can hit the ground running when he hits the oval office. >> he told a group of black lawmakers he would take it as a personal insult if hillary clinton was not elected and if great numbers didn't turn out. does he take this as a personal insult? >> listen, the feelings the president cawas conveying was authentic. they reflect his views. but the election is over. the time for advocating for a specific candidate has come to an end. the time for planning for a smooth, effective transition for the president-elect is now well under way. that's a process that president obama is deeply committed to. gardner. >> josh, you emphasized smooth transition being important. you keep pointing back to the transition that happened between george w. bush and mr. obama.

as far as i know, mr. bush never tried to lobby president obama directly to maintain some of his policies. you just told us that the president will have the opportunity to talk to the president-elect trump about some of these policies. are you suggesting that mr. obama is going to lobby mr. trump directly to maintain some of these policies that mr. trump has repeated ly -- if that's no going to happen, doesn't that mean that the iran deal, emission limits, immigration, transgender bathrooms, all those things are sort of gone on january 21? >> there's a lot there. that's good. that's okay. these are important questions. i think the first thing is, i can't speak to the nature of the conversations between president bush and then president-elect obama. i don't know if president bush

lobbied president obama on any issues or not. i think what i would say in terms of trying to help you get a sense of the kinds of conversations i'm trying to describe, i wouldn't use the word lobby. i think what i would do is i would basically say, the intent of president obama and his team is to brief president-elect trump and his team on these policies. again, the point that i'm trying to make is this. president obama has acknowledged this. the view of certain policies once you are inside government gives you a new appreciation for the benefits of those policies. am i suggesting that president trump is going to reverse himself on a whole range of things he has been campaigning on for more than a year and a half? no. i'm not trying to make that case. i don't think that's true.

but what president obama is hopeful of is -- well, what president obama is committed to is an effective transition that helps bring president-elect trump and his team up to speed on the current status of u.s. policy, including foreign policy. and there is a long tradition of presidents, even presidents in different parties, seeking to preserve some measure of continuity, particularly where those interests align. i wouldn't predict at this point how all that shakes out. the one thing i would point out is that there are certain situations where the down side of unilaterally withdrawing from some of these international agreements is significant. so the consequences, for example, with the iran deal of

pulling out, you do risk the iranians trying to break out. at the same time, there's also a u.n. security council resolution that applies to this agreement. that means this agreement is something that's supported by our allies but also by russia. that, i think, could be a pretty good indication of how united the international community is behind this agreement. president-elect trump will have to decide what impact -- sort of a unilateral withdrawal from countries around the world would have. the american people have trusted him with the presidency. he will determine the course of our foreign policy and our national security. he will have to evaluate all of those things.

my point is, is based on the existence of the u.n. security council resolution, based on the potential consequences of unilaterally withdrawing from that agreement, it's much more complicated than saying you are just going to tear the agreement up. doesn't mean he won't do it. it just means that when briefed on all of these consequences, he will have to take a close look at what policy he chooses to pursue. >> that assumes an optimism that your briefing can actually change his mind. this is a man, mr. trump, who the president described for months as someone who is deliberately ignorant about much of what goes on in the federal government and doesn't seem interested, actually, in losing his ignorance about many of these issues. you are suggesting a process here of the one -- the president educating the president-elect in

a way that will get him to change his mind. but that defies the description that the president himself has given of mr. trump as someone who is willing to take council and change his mind. >> well, the president acknowledged in the rose garden that the tone that president-elect trump displayed last night at a moment when the world was watching was markedly different than the tone that he typically adopted on the campaign trail. that's one small example. does that apply to his policy positions? who knows? but in the context of ensuring an effective transition, this administration is going to convey as much information as possible about u.s. policy and the benefits of that policy and the consequences -- the positive and negative for our pursuit of that policy. ultimately, it will be up to president-elect trump to weigh all that information, presumably

he will rely on the advice of experts and advisers who have been supportive of his campaign and maybe some who haven't been to ultimately make some of these decisions. the example of the iran deal is a good one because there are consequences that make it clear that it's not just as simple as some of the campaign rhetoric might make it seem. does that change his decision? i have no idea. you know, if he does, i guess i will read about it in the newspaper. >> so then, earlier when you said to chris, this is not going to be easy, you weren't just talking about dismantling the aca, you were talking about the obama legacy? >> i think when i said -- at one point earlier i said it won't be easy.

i think i was referring to the meeting itself. >> you were talking about trying to repeal obamacare is not as easy as decree. >> that's a different example. obviously, there's a role for congress to weigh in on this. there's a republican majority in the house and senate which would make that easier. but there are filibuster rules in the senate that i know that leader mcconnell has previously expressed a passion for protecting. we will see if he retains that passion moving forward. that certainly would require some bipartisan cooperation. same is true -- there's a different situation in the house which is that you all have well chronicled the deep divisions within the republican party in the house that make for a rather unruly majority. it means that speaker ryan, i think in some cases is going to have to look for some democratic cooperation at least.

again, when you are on the campaign trail, you say, this is -- i'm going to tear this up when i get in. you realize, i will need congress's cooperation. we have to work in bipartisan fashion to get anything done in the senate. trying to organize the republican conference of the house of representatives is kind of a mess. all of a sudden it gets harder. does that mean -- does that change the outcome? i don't know. we will have to see. my point is is that these are the kinds of difficult questions that president-elect trump will inherit, particularly when you consider the consequences of that decision, which include stripping health care from 20 or 22 million americans, significantly increasing the deficit,ificantly increasing health care costs, including for small businesses. there are consequences to deal with that often in the context

of campaign rhetoric aren't accounted for. >> what i'm getting at is this. if people are tempted to say the obama legacy is toast, would you contend with that? based on your analysis of the obamacare appeal and what you said about the iran deal? >> again, i think it's far too early to tell exactly what kind of decisions president-elect trump will make and what impact they will have on the priorities that president obama has so proudly achieved. it certainly is not as positive a picture i would be painting if secretary clinton had ee american emerges victorious. i would feel more confident because of her rhetoric of pursuing many of the priorities president obama focused on. mr. trump ran on a different platform. what president trump chooses to do with regard to those policies as he makes decisions is

something -- is something you can't fully analyze in the abstract. we'll have to -- as his presidency moves forward, you will have an opportunity to evaluate what impact his decisions have had on the accomplishments that president obama and his team are quite proud of. >> it's not as positive as if hillary clinton had been elected but not as bleak as the president portrayed it last week? >> the president stands by the rhetoric he used on the campaign trail. the president is also himself in describing his own campaigning and his own governing have noted there's a significant difference between the two things. it doesn't mean that you fold on your principles. it doesn't mean that you are necessarily overpromising. it just means that they are two different things. it's why there are all these

open questions that only president-elect trump can answer. i don't know how many of them he will try to answer on the first day. you guys will have to let me know. >> let me ask you this. you said to margaret that when the president is overseas, he will try to reassure allies and partners of the steadfast commitment. that's in question now. how can he do that exactly? >> well, he can do that based on a longstanding ptradition of democratic and republican presidents reinforcing our relationships around the world that advance our national interest. there's a democratic and republican tradition to stren h strengthen our alliance with south korea, for example. what we have found is our alliance with them supersedes any individual presidency. it supersedes any individual political party because we have seen multiple presidents in both parties seek to strengthen that alliance.

so that would be -- if you are looking for a reason to be hopeful about the future of the u.s./south korea alliance, that's what would you dryou wou is the long history of both parties seeking to do that. is that something president-elect will do? i don't know. we will find out. >> the president will say, i hope, not assui assure. >> the president will say there's reason to be optimistic because we have seen presidents in both parties pursue a strong alliance with south korea. i'm not singling them out for a specific reason. are some of the leaders likely to say, mr. trump appears to be different than recent republican presidents? they won't be wrong about that. the president can offer some measure of confidence. the american people have chosen to give president-elect trump

the responsibility for figuring that out. >> one quick logistical thing. do you expect a news conference tomorrow. >> unclear. we will keep you posted. at a minimum, you can expect the president will spend time taking questions from all of you over the course of his trip overseas next week. >> and maybe tomorrow? >> maybe tomorrow. but we will try and get you clarity about that before the end of the day. >> any expectation that president-elect trump would take questions? >> you have to check with his team on that. >> on the topic of reassuring world leaders, has the president reached out to any world leaders or have any reached out to him since the result? since the president said earlier this year that different world leaders are rattled by donald trump? >> when i walked out here some time ago now, i was not aware of any conversations that president obama had had with foreign leaders at this point. but if there are calls like

that, we will let you know. i can't speak to who reached out to the white house or u.s. government since last night. i will let those individual governments speak for themselves. on the course of president obama's travels next week, he will have an opportunity to see the leaders of many of the countries with whom the united states has an important relationship. we will have more details about that trip in the next couple of days. >> one of the countries that the president will be visiting is peru. i wanted to ask about tpp. there was an idea that the lame duck period would be focused on the president stumping for and campaigning for tpp publically and with congress. given the fact that this election has repudiated the idea of trade with many nations, with

donald trump's victory, has that changed? is the president still going to stump for tpp? >> the first observation is this is a question you would ask regardless of the outcome of the election last night. i think what i can say in general -- the first thing i can tell suh thyou is president oba an opportunity to speak to leader mcconnell on the phone. the president is hopeful that he will be able to connect with speaker ryan at some point relatively soon. we will let you know when that's occurred. they did have a conversation about the outcome of the election. president obama did congratulate leader mcconnell on his success in retaining the title of majority leader of the united states senate. and they had an opportunity to discuss some of the priorities

for the lame duck session. i don't have a detailed readout to share. but president obama does continue to believe that this is the best opportunity that the congress has to take advantage of the benefits of a transpacific partnership agreement that cuts taxes -- 18,000 taxes that other countries impose or american products. we have a strong case to make with regard to the transpacific partnership. we will encourage republican leaders to take it up and pass it because of the enormous benefits that would accrue to american workers, american businesses and the broader u.s. economy. gregory. >> has the president ordered that president trump now receive the same full president's daily briefing that he receives every day? >> i can tell you that presidential daily briefing and other intelligence materials has

been made available to president trump -- president-elect trump, vice-president-elect pence and a couple members of his team. this is a courtesy that president bush extended to president-elect obama, vice-president-elect biden and a couple members of their team. this is an important part of ensuring the kind of smooth transition that president obama has prioritized. >> it's the same briefing that he receives? >> i can't speak to the nature of the information that is presented. check with the dni. the idea here is that the president-elect and vice-president-elect and some of their key national security advisors, a couple of designated officials, can begin to get access to the kind of material that they will need to make important foreign policy

decisions once president trump takes office. >> following up on the question about pardons for secretary clinton specifically, but also generally, the president was asked about this in august about last minute pardons. he said that any last minute pardons would have to go through the office of the white house council, through the regular process and that all pardons would be based on merit and not political consideration. does that still stand? wouldn't that preclude the president from giving a last minute pardon to secretary clinton? >> i remember when you had an opportunity to ask president obama about this at the pentagon earlier this summer. the answer that president obama gave you in that news conference still applies. i wouldn't speculate at this point about what impact that may have on hypothetical pardon requests that he receives. i will just say the guidance

that president obama shared with you is still operative. >> is the clinton cavaliers event on for tomorrow? >> absolutely. andrew. >> the president said he was encouraged about things he heard from trump over last 24 hours. does he have confidence that donald trump will respect the rule of law? >> andrew, i think at this point, what president obama is responding to is the tone that president-elect trump displayed at his event last night. the significance of that is that mr. trump had to make a conscious decision -- president-elect trump had to make a doconscious decision abo the tone he was going to use in speaking to not just his supporters in the ball room but also the millions of americans watching on tv and the tens of millions of people watching

around the world. it's a high stakes moment. it was an opportunity for president-elect trump to make an impression. i'm confident that he was aware of that. and at that moment, he chose to adopt a tone that seemed generally familiar to people who have been watching presidents-elect at election night events. that would seem to suggest that certain basic principles of our democracy are likely to be upheld. certainly one of those principles is ensuring that criminal investigations and our

criminal justice system is not infected or -- infected with partisan politics. the question is whether or not that tone will persist. and i'm sure that president obama won't be the only one watching. >> does the result of the election alter the president's post-presidency plans? is he likely to make -- remain more in the public eye than he would have otherwise done had hillary clinton won? >> look, again, the election results are barely 12 hours old. but in those 12 hours, i'm not aware of any change or reconsideration that the president has made about his post-presidency plans. other than the likelihood that he probably is looking forward to his post-presidential vacation now more than ever. yes, ma'am. >> thank you.

i'm a correspondent from afghanistan. >> nice to see you. >> thank you. i would like to ask you, how does the white house transfer the afghanistan policy to the next president? do you think that afghanistan people should have high expectation from the new president? do you think any change in the policy toward afghanistan? >> listen, i will confess that i don't recall having heard president-elect trump speak extensively about his view of u.s. policy toward afghanistan. some of your colleagues in the press corps here may have covered debates or other events with mr. trump more closely and they can fill you in on that. it's not clear to me exactly what sort of preferences or views he has articulated with review to our policy with afghanistan. i would put this in the category of other important foreign policy decisions he will have to make.

to ensure that he is effectively positioned to make a good, smart decision that's consistent with our national interest, president obama and his national security team will ensure that president-elect trump and his team have access to all of the information that's necessary to make future decisions about u.s. policy in that region of the world. this is obviously the kinds of decisions that the next president will make will have a significant impact on our foreign policy and will have a significant impact on the thousands of u.s. service members that are currently serving in afghanistan and encountering the threats that emanate from afghanistan. the stakes of that decision are high. the kinds of decisions that have to be made in that environment are not obvious. the next president will certainly ben frefit from the k of informed, carefully considered advice from leaders

in our military, leaders in our diplomatic corps, intelligence community that have been very focused on u.s. policy in afghanistan. okay? john decker. john decker. >> thanks a lot, josh. the president today in the rose garden praised the transition model that was put forward from former president george w. bush, said that's the transition model that he would like to follow. as it relates to not only president george w. bush's post presidency model but also bill clinton's post presidency model, george h.w. bush's post presidency model, they have refrained from criticizing their successors. would president obama also follow that same model, refrain from criticizing president trump and his policies once president obama is a former president? >> listen, i don't think i can

say anything declarative about that question. presumably that's something between now and january 20th you or one of your colleagues could ask him. i think what i can tell you is that i've heard him say and i believe he said this in public, he has appreciated how particularly early in his presidency former george presid george w. bush was not a regular active public presence offering his critique of the new president. and the president -- and president obama believes that that was not just beneficial to his ability to run the country and make difficult decisions, i think it also reveals that -- it

also reveals the character of our 43rd president. surely i'm confident in saying that president george w. bush did not agree with every decision that president obama made in his first year or two in office, but he kept his disagreements to himself and i know that president obama has appreciated president bush taking that step to give the incoming president the running room necessary to make decisions, to advocate them for them publicly in a way that would have been much more difficult if the recently departed president was critiquing his every move. >> i wanted to ask about the relationship. it's an unusual relationship in a way, that president obama has

had with the president elect. i say that because early on in the president's tenure as president as you may recall the president elect questioned the citizenship of president obama. >> i do recall that. >> and then a short time after that the president famously went after, you could say, the president elect at a correspondence dinner, brought a lot of laughter. i realize -- >> from almost everybody in the room. >> i realize that the election is so fresh. >> yeah. >> but has the president had time to be introspective in the sense that the person that he's had this unusual type of relationship from afar essentially is now succeeding him as president? >> well, it's not news to observe that president elect

trump and president obama have deep long standing and public disagreements on a wide range of issues including with regard to some of the tactics and rhetoric that the president elect used on the campaign trail. the president was quite outspoken about that in the context of this election. but the election is over. the american people made a decision. president obama didn't get to choose his successor, the american people did. and president obama's responsibility now is to ensure that the incoming president no matter how significant their disagreements can get off to a running start and president obama, including in his capacity as a former president, will genuinely be rooting for president trump's success in uniting and leading this country. >> president obama and president elect donald trump actually met

face-to-face before or will this be their very first meeting? >> i believe that they had one other opportunity where they were at a public event together. off the top of my head i don't remember where that is, but i feel like they may have had one. that's -- but i guess what i would say is this, they do not have an extensive personal relationship and -- this is not a situation where they've, you know, had many conversations or -- you know, or played golf together or any of that business. so i guess that will be among the many, many, many reasons that tomorrow's meeting will be rather interesting. okay. chris, i will give you the last one. >> thanks, josh. i think there is a lot of fear between lgbt people and others who have seen progress like muslims and immigrants that are

worried about prosecution. what is president obama's message to them? >> president obama's message to them is our country has benefited from a steadfast commitment to a set of democratic institutions and these institutions have been durable even through a civil war, through a couple world wars, through financial calamities and the president has enormous confidence and faith in those institutions. in part because those institutions are made up of patriotic americans. that's true whether we are talking about public servants who are employees of the federal government or the brave men and women of our armed forces. those institutions serve the american people well and it's important for our leaders to

demonstrate faith in them and to rely on them. that faith in those institutions has served very well some of our country's greatest presidents. the other observation that president obama would make, and he did so in the rose garden, is that progress in our country hasn't moved along a straight line and progress that we make in some of these areas, you know, is characterized by two steps forward and one step back. sometimes it's characterized by delayed progress. the observation that president obama would make is the best response to that is not to lose hope or to be cynical or to withdraw from the public

discourse. it actually calls for greater engagement. it calls for more people who feel passionately and strongly about these issues to stand up for what they believe in. secretary clinton i think put it best, it's worth fighting for what's right. she certainly had done that throughout her three-decade career in public life and it's something that president obama has certainly done not just while he has held elective office but even before he entered elective office. i think it should be -- let me say it this way, i think secretary clinton intended that as very good advice for people who may be feeling discouraged today and it's understanding that people are feeling discouraged because it's natural that you are going to be

disappointed when the candidate that you supported in the election doesn't win, but even the losing candidate in this case does not think that that should be used as an excuse to withdraw from the public debate and public discourse. if anything it should serve as a motivation to become more deeply engaged and more deeply involved and not just in a presidential election year. >> i have a variation on the fire wall question. is there anything the white house can do to protect them, from the next administration? >> again, i won't speculate at this point about what president elect trump may or may not do. every time the president has initiated a decision or made a policy decision or taken an executive action he has done so with a long-term perspective. his approach to policy making has been to be cognizant of the

long-term implications of the decisions that he's making and it means that he's making these decisions with the assumption that the decisions will be durable, that they will be in place for some time and at the benefits that the american people will enjoy as a result of those decisions will be present for a long time. so that's been his approach since his last day in office, but, you know, ultimately the approach that president elect trump takes is one that he alone will determine. thanks, everybody, we will see you tomorrow. donald trump will be at the white house tomorrow to meet with president obama and he will begin the formal transition process. back now to our programming on congressional and executive branch access to information. thinking of this as i would guess more of a political

exercise than anything else. >> i will take a brief crack at that from the standpoint of somebody who worked in the general counsels office as opposed to a committee oversight investigator or oversight lawyer. two things i guess i would say. number one, i think because of my background as a litigator my advice would be litigation centric, right, you need to be focused, you need to be precise and i'm talking about subpoenas and requests for information. you need to leave as little room as possible for the departments -- the executive branch departments to concoct objections. so you come at it from that standpoint. the other thing that i think i would advise is given notwithstanding my advice that litigation is probably not a great option for the congress i suspect it's going to continue to be an option that will be used and so i would be giving

advice on how to shape information requests and how to conduct the investigation in a way that makes it more saleable in the judicial context when we get there down the road. >> i would -- one thing, maybe it's sort of the flip side to what you were saying, which is it probably makes sense to think about it from a sort of lawyerly litigation like perspective some of the time, but it also makes sense to think about it in terms of public politics. so if you think about some of the most successful in the broad scope congressional investigations in american history, so think about the 1920s munitions investigations which almost certainly delayed american entry into world war ii by creating a large sort of public peace movement and movement that was skeptical of the war making capabilities of the administrative state or think of the church committee in the '70s. these are committees that were

careful but they were also highly cognizant about the fact that their work didn't just face towards the executive branch, wasn't just inward facing in congress but faced out to the public. their reports were written and their hearings were structured so as to convince members of the public to adopt a certain perspective, right, and it's a reminder that facts aren't -- facts are -- in some sense found but in another sense they are assembled. there isn't a sort of situation out in the world that your job is just to find, your job is to conduct a narrative about the world and convince people of that narrative and so that would be my sort of advice insofar as you want the investigations to have real public punch. >> i've always experienced working with those people who were, you know, legends in oversight that they all viewed it as a staged process.

that you start with a problem and try to identify it and construct relationships with the agencies that you're dealing with at the same time. that's the importance of having long lasting staff, staff that's still there and going from case to case and being credible as a long standing group that information comes in, there's some attachment to the agencies that are being overseen and before those kinds of relationships developed it resulted in calls back and forth

trying to avoid being -- a particular situation suddenly showing up in the "new york times" or the post or anything like that and working through the kinds of problems that agencies do have in order to -- you know, to fulfill their objectives and, you know, and the objectives of the president as opposed to, you know, the sense that congress has, you know, in vesting this power out. and the staged process usually went from, you know, one level of pressure to another. never starting out with a subpoena. a subpoena was, you know -- you know, for a long period of time it was there was a big event and a subpoena -- you know, a scheduling a subpoena conference, you know, to vote for one triggered reactions, triggered some of the

negotiation necessary and if a subpoena was issued, that was a big deal. this is no longer there. subpoenas are, you know, more committees in the 114th committee chairmen have the authority to issue subpoenas on their own that never was there before and it results in trigger happy kinds of actions and going forward without having the full, you know -- you know -- you know, stakts before the-- facts them. pogo organization in its attempts to teach, you know, brings that forward, you know, and is part of the public panoply there giving information to make that kind of oversight process, you know, really work,

helping with whistleblowers, you know, providing the background information that's necessary for going from one stage to the next and i think that's important. i try to -- i try to teach the people who are calling me, you know, read this, here is -- you know, it's been done before and this is why it was done before and where you can go at particular times. we don't have that institutional memory anymore, in the committees or even in some of the support organizations that are there, like crs and gao which have been cut by the appropriations process and can't keep the steady people there. we've lost a kind of a sense of how oversight is -- should be conducted in a way that is

supportive, both, you know, back and forth. >> another question in the audience. let's get you a microphone. >> thank you very much. my name is honori chu. i'm an economist by trade so not a lawyer. listening to this fascinating conversation. it seems to me like the executive branch federal agencies are being asked to do more and more with less and less. i don't know how much of this is a function of the elections where more programs are coming online, but where are the resources to fund these programs, particularly in terms of the human resources, it seems that civil servants are being asked to do a lot, handling hundreds of million dollar projects, et cetera, and i know in the heat of getting this stuff well managed it's hard to look at congress and oversight as something positive instead of

seeing it as something that's detracting me from really what i need to do. i was also very pleased in the last session to hear that resources from professor wright may be a problem affecting congress also and maybe a lot of these things talking about institutional memory, anyone who has been on congress notices an army of unpaid staff, but any member i think would say that is the staff that is the backbone of how this institution runs. so there seems to be resources lacking as well to keep people to maybe do more meaningful oversight over long-term. so my question is how much is resources at the end of the day maybe something as simple as that causing this discord where in human nature lack of resources has been a big problem and causes people to fight, and if so how are you having these discussions to try to increase salaries torques try to hire more people, who maybe even promise less to the american people of what government will

do so that you can get to a better place where you can have problems that are effective, have the proper oversight and bring this together in a way that is less it seems more on the legal side subpoenas and things, i'm just hoping never to experience. thank you. >> steve, send him a subpoena. >> i will 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, you know, very broad ranging and with lots and lots of document requests and it appears to be clear from 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 -- 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. so i think it's an exacerbating issue. i do not think it's -- you know, the reality is the administrations find the resources that they need to get these things done, but -- but when there is -- when there's not a lot of respect on either side of the aisle -- not the aisle, the -- the administration, the avenue then it's -- the lack -- 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 if there were adequate resources on both ends of it and everybody was happy with the resources i don't think the problem goes away. i do think it's a more fill -- at the moment at least i think it's a more philosophically driven conflict between the branches. >> it's worth noting that concerns about congressional staffing levels and specifically 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 sort of robust public polling findings is that people across both parties think that members of the congress have too many staffers and they think members of congress have like an order of magnitude more staff than they do. so people think there is just this giant army of congressional staff, everybody in the room knows that's not true and they've wanted to see it cut. at least since the '80s it's been hard to push for more congressional staff because of

those sort of two intertwined misconceptions. >> there is a third less staff at least over the last -- over the last two decades. it's shriveled, actually. don't stay enough, people, you know, aren't -- you know, aid has been cut and that's an important incentive for having the institutional memory that allows for more effective oversight and, you know, and comfortableness between the branches and on the hill itself. >> we have time for one more question. yes, brandon.

>> brandon sawyer from wayne state law school. we've talked a lot about committees and subpoena power, if you had any insight into the role of individual members who aren't chairmen of a committee, how can they exercise oversight and one of the things i sort of thought of was in the senate the use of holds on nominees to get information wholly unrelated to that individual's, you know -- the merits of their nomination if you think that's and in the seemingly category or is it in the sort of going nuclear category? >> oh, it's not going nuclear. this is conventional warfare and it's very effective, having been held up twice for many months and both times i was confirmed. but don't tell anybody how effective it is, please. >> rand paul has figured this out really effectively, right, he did this with david barron to the first circuit, he did it

with dci, he has done it with a lot of people and he has gotten in many cases a lot of what he wanted out the of the administration. i think it's -- okay, i should qualify this. when i say i think it's great what i mean is i think it's great as a sort of way of members of congress of getting what they want. i don't necessarily agree with paul's goals in those particular cases but i think, you know, it's -- what i started out talking about, congress has all these different levers, houses from levers they can pull, individuals members have levers they can pull. i would say another thing they can do, by the way, this future debate clause, leaking state secrets is one way that members have influenced public policy in really helpful ways actually. so e for example -- >> don't go there. >> so, for example, the senator griff vel leaked the pentagon papers to the press, in the '80s there were all kinds -- 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 and as long as its members doing it on the floor which in many cases it has been henry gonzales throughout 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 branch's argument with respect to the production of 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 and if you look at all the major leaks recently -- whether they leak it or not that's the argument that the executive branch relies on and you look at who is harming the most harmful stuff is executive branch. edward snowden was nsa. yeah, that's the argument they are going to use but they will use that argument whether it's true or not. >> next up we have scott roehm, the vice president of the

constitution project with a few remarks, but before we get to scott i want to please join me in thanking this really distinguished panel of experts thank you all. scott. >> thanks very much, jocelyn. i have to say i didn't think that was the discussion i was going to follow, but in any event i just want to take two or three minutes to offer a few concluding observations on the basis of i think what were two terrific panels today. and i want to start by taking a step back to comments senator levin made right at the skrout set. an effective and well functioning oversight system really is critical to your democracy. i think we've heard several panelists echo it's important to congress and the executive branch and in that regard it should be important, right, to all of us, not just immediate stakeholders in the process. 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 in its

way. i think it's worth highlighting a few of those things on our way out, particularly given the moment in time that ron white flagged on the first panel, right, which everybody is aware, congressional and presidential election coming up with uncertain results or particularly good time to reflect on all of these issues. so some of the characteristics of high quality oversight i noted that folks identified. probably the number one that it's fact based and not politically driven, right. that it's not partisan. so it has a sort of objective legitimacy to it. that it's bipartisan, though josh might disagree that that's an important condition. that it's in-depth, right, so that there is a mechanism for if there is an investigation for oversight to then be ongoing, there can be follow up, there can be regular monitoring beyond 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 raise, low quality oversight might have been the most repeated one, right, when the executive branch feels or there's some objective indicia that the oversight is politically driven or it's unduly burdensome in some other way, that it isn't bipartisan, again, josh excepting you out. yeah, that isn't bipartisan. insufficient resources or capacity for committees and staff or the members who are carrying this out. andy's point about is there just an inherent philosophical difference between the branches in terms of their roles and responsibilities with respect to oversight. i think both of those, right, sort of characteristics of high quality oversight and the challenges and obstacles that

stand in their way suggest some potential conditions, right, for facilitating better oversight going forward and i think, you know, some of them are going to be obvious from what i flagged this morning. avoiding low quality partisan oversight, in part i think senator levin flagged this at the outset so that courts don't have to step in and fix rights and responsibilities on both sides that neither branch may find acceptable going forward, making sure committees have experienced professional staff with appropriate resources and training, ways to build relationships between executive branch personnel and the committees who oversee them, maybe there need to be more opportunities for that particularly if staff turnover is happening at a rate that it wasn't previously. and then i think one that i find really interesting that was brought up numerous times is that, you know, the sort of 80/20 problem. right. if 20% of the oversight is what the public sees and a lot of the

really sort of problematic or what the public feels is partisan driven oversight is in that 20% they don't know about the 80% that's working. is there a way to raise up the 80% both so people see that as more of a functioning democracy and so that there can be lessons learned from the 80% that perhaps aren't leading into the 20%. so again, flag this all because i think it's an important time to be thinking about it and as david said these are not issues that we sort of dove into in-depth today and it's sort of beyond the scope of this conference, but i do think it's, you know, potential kind of gris for the mill for the next one of these which i hope we can have because this one was wonderful and i hope that the various stakeholders who are in the room and who may have tuned in remotely will think seriously about this stuff and the ways in which they can help facilitate more effective oversight in the next congress and administration to come and with that i want to,

again, thank the levin center, senator levin, all of our panelists, pew center for hosting us, i thought this was a great event to please join me in thanking all of them. [ applause ] tonight at 8:00 eastern on american history tv the first of two days of programming on

winston churchill's friends and contemporaries, segments about the world war ii british prime minister's relationships with monarchs, american presidents and how he was viewed by other europeans. also a look at winston churchill's financial team. part one of winston churchill's friends and contemporaries begins at 8:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span 3. first of all, the key point in my mind in a transition is the pivot from the campaign which we are currently in to governing. that is the key shift in this less than 80-day period. and that's what the next president of the united states and his or her team needs to focus on. and that is a pretty difficult shift to make after working so hard to get elected.

secondly, it is monumental task, as max noted and i can say from a business side if you just think about it as i speak to business groups, what if you had less than 80 days to organize a company with 4,000 people that you needed to get in place, senate confirmed as clay noted, $4 trillion budget, 2 million civilian employees and a tremendously diverse set of activities and portfolios that usually makes even the most fearless, confident and competent ceos heads spin a bit. that is monumental undertaking. thirdly, i would say that the transition process has come a long way from when president truman who first initiated the thought of a transition, orderly transition, with president elect

quite eisenhower who by the way was not warm and receptive to president truman's overtures which then got a tart vintage harry truman handwritten note back to ike saying the screw balls advising you are not giving you good advice or something to that effect, but since that time i think we have seen and josh can speak to this, a -- a readiness, a receptivity, a feeling of patriotism, responsibility, duty on the prior administration to work with the incoming administration, even if they are of another party. and probably the best transition that's taken place is the bush 43 transition to the obama administration and that is a good example. so there has not been a lack of good will or seriousness of purpose. what there has been a lack of is kind of order, definition and

formality in the transition process and that's what max and his team and the center is working diligently to really help frame that, particularly with the dramatic changes -- dramatic changes that have taken place since 1992 in the clinton transition, but even in the last ten years. united nations officials now talk about the process for developing rules, guidelines and sustainable goals among countries for the long-term peaceful out of outer space activities. back in june a u.n. committee issued the first set of agreed upon guidelines for space cooperation. good morning. welcome to the state department, my name is jonathan margolis, i'm the deputy assistant secretary of state in the bureau of oceans, international environmental and scientific affairs, my specific portfolio is science, space and health issues. in the oes bureau we advance

u.s. foreign policy goals, in critical areas of environment, oceans, health and science. we work on climate change, including the paris agreement and the recently negotiated hfc agreement under the montreal protocol. we work on oceans and fisheries issues including the major our ocean conference con dungted in the state department under the leadership of secretary kerry. we work on health issues, on zika outbreak, ebola and global health security which seeks to enhance global preparedness and response to the threats of infectious disease and of course today we are here to talk about space sustainability. for many of you in the audience this will be your first introduction to the issue of sustaining the outer space environment and for others today. it will be an opportunity to learn more about the ongoing efforts by the united states, by other countries and by the united nations to preserve the outer space environment.

by the end of today we hope that one thing will be clear, with the increased use of and reliance on space, preserving the outer space environment for current and future generations is in everyone's best interests and that's true whether you are here representing a government, a business, an ngo or just yourself. one of the places we work on these issues is through the u.n.'s committee on peaceful uses of outer space and we're thankful today that mr. peter martinez who chairs the committee's working group on long-term sustainability has traveled from cape town, south africa to share further insights with us on this important work. and like wise we're grateful that we have here today as well miss simonetta dee peep poe and mr. david kendall from canada the chair of the united nations committee on peaceful uses of

outer space. thank you all for coming. in june of this past year the u.n. committee on peaceful uses of outer space agreed to 12 long-term sustainability guidelines, we call them the lts guidelines and they represent the first ever agreed best practices for safe and responsible use of space. this is work that started under the united nations in 2009 and this is a major milestone going forward after seven years of concerted effort. the united states believes that this agreement is a significant accomplishment and major step forward in international cooperation on preserving outer space environment. the guidelines set global norms that will maintain the space environment so that future generations can get benefit from transformative technologies for climate modeling, navigation, communications and health as well as strength and security. additionally with the increase of private investment in space it has become even more important to provide a stable

predictable long-term framework for space operations. these guidelines incorporate a range of best practices including sharing of information for enhanced spaceflight safety, expanded cooperation in space weather monitoring and investigating new measures to manage long-term space debris. we appreciate the constructive efforts within the committee to ensure this first set of lts guidelines were completed prior to the expiration of the working group's work plan in june of 2016. we also look forward to continuing the work to develop additional lts guidelines over the next two years. on the national level, many countries have started looking at how they can best implement these first sets of guidelines and we believe that this action taken by nation states, by member states, is an important benefit of the lts guidelines. i can provide a firsthand report on how this is going, just yesterday we held our second

ever bilateral civil space dialogue with china and discussed these very issues and some of our colleagues from that discussion are here today with us. we will hear more from governmental officials, from private sector space experts on how these lts guidelines were developed and their importance moving forward. one of the main themes you will hear today is the importance of international cooperation in ensuring the outer space environment. when copious set out to develop the lts guidelines copious member states acknowledged the approach to tackling the preserve the outer space environment and today we have assembled an outstanding group of people to speak to you about this. in our first panel united nations experts will discuss the process by which the first set of lts guidelines were developed and next steps in developing additional guidelines. in our second panel in morning we will hear from government experts from across sector of regional groups on their efforts

to implement the first set of guidelines and their commitment to developing additional guidelines through copuos. the third panel will cop cyst of private sector stakeholders, we look forward to hearing more about their experience in developing the first set of guidelines and how they intend to advance and engage with copuos as we move forward. finally today we will hear from a number of individuals regarding next steps in developing a second set of guidelines with the goal of creating a compendium of lts guidelines to be endorsed by the u.n. general assembly in 2018. so on behalf of the state department let me use this opportunity to thank you all for joining us today and for thanking them for coming to speak to us. your presence is essential in conveying the understanding and importance of space sustainability for the benefit of all mankind and the reasons why we should work together to address this challenge. before i close, let me

personally thank michael simpson and vac for i can't samson both of the secure world foundation. what you're seeing today is the work of not only the state department but ngos and others that have brought this discussion format in an open forum and we absolutely rely on organizations like the secure world foundation to make this possible. so with that in mind let me welcome to the floor or to the podium michael simpson the executive director of the secure world foundation. thank you. [ applause ] >> well, for those many of you whose faces are very familiar with several acts of cooperation and consultation and collaboration in the field of space sustainability, secure world foundation probably doesn't need much introduction. for the rest simply be aware

that we have for years described our work as seeking cooperative solutions for space sustainability and so here we are celebrating space sustainability, advocating increased cooperation and enjoying the presence of so many people with whom we have cooperated along the way to make this -- to make this day possible. in some ways i'm welcoming you to a celebration. six hard years of work has brought us 12 guidelines to support the long-term sustainability of space activities. guidelines remember that have been adopted among countries who have not always found consensus easy to achieve. from practical affirmations of how to best fulfill obligations under the space treaties to

foundational guidance on the sharing of critical data about satellites, debris and weather. we have coaxed progress out of what looked at times like barron soil. so add to the celebration we are hearing encouraging reports from the inter session nl work that the copuos working group on long-term sustainability of space activities has been undertaking since its success last june. these reports fuel hopes that further consensus will bring more agreed guidelines to the table next year, but of course, i also welcome you to an event that includes lunch. and it's those of you that were thrust by great writers like

arthur c. clark and robert hineline who know there is no such thing as a free lunch. in fact, today's program will attest there is much work to be done, whether you see the guidelines as soft law or no law at all, they will still have to stand the same test as hard law or sound policy. they will need to impact behavior. as we review the track that brought us here and chart the course to come, i hope we can bear in mind that the way forward will pass through the seminole work of unis space plus 50 and will carry the weight and aspiration of other broad agreements like the sustainable development goals, the sendi

accord and cop 21. so as we get back to the hard work so many of us in this room are used to sharing together i still invite you to think of that work as a celebration. knowing that having kept alive the principle of using space for peaceful purposes, we now get to show how together we can focus those purposes on meeting the greatest challenges of the one planet we all share. so to paraphrase our late departed mr. spock, celebrate, work hard and prosper. thank you. [ applause ]

>> good morning, everyone, my name is victoria samson, i'm the washington office director of the secure world foundation and i'd like to add my thanks and appreciation for everyone in the audience for coming and to our speakers for sharing their expertise with us. so with that enough of the welcomes let's get the speakers up on the podium and have you guys come up. could the first panelists come up, please. >> all right. you should have everyone's bios in front of you and so with that

we will start with the first speaker sigh net at that di p pippo. >> good morning, everyone, distinguished participants, guests and colleagues. i'm very pleased to be here with you today. allow me to thank the organizers for arranging this timely event on the important topics of space sustainability, i would like also to take this opportunity to acknowledge a recent success story about the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. as has already been stated and as my colleague will elaborate in more detail, in june 2016 the committee on the peaceful uses of outer space reached a multi-lateral milestone when it agreed to a first set of guidelines for the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. this concrete output demonstrates a collective recognition by states that space

is a key resource for the benefit of human kind and that measures that could enhance sustainability and protect the space environment for current and future generations are in the common interest. the first set of guidelines was not, however, developed without genuine effort on the part of many stakeholders. in this regard i would like to express my admiration for all delegations to participated in the process so far and i would especially like to acknowledge the chair of the working group, peter martinez, for his outstanding role in bringing delegations together in this complex process and the david kendall for his skillful handling of the adoption procedures at the copuos session in june. continued collaboration between all interested parties will be a key importance as the working group on the long-term

sustainability of outer space activities develops a second set of guidelines and finally companion guidelines including the preamble text to be referred to the general assembly in 2018. larry completion. let me address the long-term sustainability of outer space activities and the strategic work to be undertaken under the 50th anniversary of the uniony space conference to take place in june 2018. they endorse a set of priorities which constitute the common role of uni space plus 50 and beyond. the priorities as defined and endorsed by copuos in june are, number one, global partnership in space exploration and innovation, number two, legal regime the outer space and global space governance current and future perspectives, number

three, enhance the formation and change of space objects and events. number four, international framework for space weather services. number five, strengthen space corporation for global health, number six, international corporation towards low emissions and number seven capacity building for the 21st century. those priorities have been selected based on an assessment of the crosscutting areas of governance, resiliency, interoperability, capacity building and sustainability development. they are strategically interlinked in our design to provide a focused and result oriented approach for the upcoming work of member states and the office for outer space affairs. included in this is the fostering of dialogue between governments and ngos, industry, private sector and civil society. the priorities are intended to

help us identify the areas where stronger space governance and supporting structures are required to protect the space environment and secure the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. they also help us ensure that the benefits of space support missions in implementing the agenda for sustainability development and reaching these goals. the interlink analogies between them reflect the need for strong coordination, mechanisms on governance, operability and resiliency. as an example space exploration and innovation covered by priority number one is an essential driver for opening up new domains in space, science and technology. triggering new partnerships and developing capabilities that create new opportunities for addressing global challenges. there is a strong aim to foster dialogue with space industry and the private sector in this

regard. dear colleagues, you will likely have noticed the close connections between the guidelines for the long-term sustainability of outer space activities and the uni space plus 50 priorities. the guideline on the safety of space explorations to highlight an example are fundamentally linked to the priorities on enhanced information exchange on space objects and on an international framework for space weather services. the fact that guidelines on sharing orbital information on space objects, debris monitoring and space weather forecasts have been reached consensus have already been -- reached consensus demonstrates a clear acknowledgment by the international community of the importance of enhancing information exchange on space objects in advance and on building up an international framework for space weather services. regarding long-term work on the sustainability of outer space

activities the priority on the legal regime the outer space and government space perspectives that's the title of the priority number two in combination with the priority on enhanced information exchange from space object and advance number three is particularly interesting. allow me, therefore, to make an assessment of certain critical interlink analogies. theme tick priority number two on the legal regime strives to promote the university at of the five u.n. tritees on outer space and assess the state of affairs of those treaties and their relationship with related nonlegally binding instruments. the theme tick priority aims to analyze the effectively of the regime of outer space and identify areas that may require additional consideration. there is a close connection between the work undertaken by relevant working groups of both the scientific and technical

subcommittee and the legal subcommittee of copuos, efficiency, coordination and the avoidance of duplication of work are central pillars in this structure. the goal of priority number three on enhanced information exchange on space objects in advance is to define and develop requirements for enhanced information exchange and notification procedures particularly on risk reduction efforts for the safety of space operations. cooperation mechanisms to support this objective should be identified and capacity building and outreach activities on transparency and confidence building measures encouraged. in this context let me reiterate the importance of building a robust and cost effective information system that in the end must serve all relevant actors. i wish to record for you information a special report by the united nations interagency coordination mechanism better

known as u.n. space which is a long standing former coordination mechanism in the u.n. system under the leadership of the office for outer space affairs. this report was prepared by the u.n. in close coordination with the united nations office and issued for copuos this june. you can find it as document a/ac.105/1116. the report addresses among other matters the current information exchange mechanisms and notification procedures under the legal regime of outer space for which they discharge the responsibilities of the secretary general. among those are the register on space objects and operational mechanisms instituted under the outer space treaty, the rescue agreement and the nuclear power source principles. the united nation register is the most important global treaty-based transparency and confidence building mechanism in the space arena.

given that un as the formal authority to discharge the responsibilities of the united nation sg under the legal regime the outer space there is increasing attention paid by copuos to study ways and means of gaining efficiency and avoiding duplication in fundamental registration and notification procedure at a governmental level. any efforts to support robust transparency and confidence building measures call for realistic legally based and policy motivated requirements. the operational needs and requirements must not be underestimated and this is why there is a call by copuos to study those existing long standing mechanisms as a basis and fund amount for enhanced risk reduction communication. i would like to recall the importance of the extensive review done by the legal subcommittee of copuos nearly ten years ago on enhancing registration practice. as you are aware this work

resulted in the successful general assembly 2007 resolution number 62/101. the resolution gives room for additional registration reporting on, for example, the change in status of space objects. it may be appropriate to look into the application and scope of this resolution in forming additional guidance for voluntary information exchange and risk reduction notification. dear colleagues, let me turn to another but closely related area of sustainability that is also covered by dedicated priority namely on international framework for space weather services. it is becoming increasingly evident that there is a need to strengthen the reliability of space systems in their ability to respond to the impact of adverse space weather and to develop a space weather roadmap for international coordination and information exchange on

space weather events and their mitigation. space weather is recognized as a global challenge and increasing awareness of this issue with help to identify governance and cooperation identify governmen corporation mechanisms. globally there is already a growing interest in understanding solar interactions. this is not only for scientific reasons. therefore the global community needs to be prepared. unoosa has been involved for many years through dedicated scientific activities with states and international space agencies, including longstanding collaboration with nasa. and through capacity building programs on space web. we are also working closely about the international

organization in addressing aerospace programs, areas of concern to the space communities, including space weather. this work is closely connected to 50 nsf number 4. your colleagues conclusion. they have been able to show while we as an international community have achieved already something significant in this area, a lot remains to be done. unoosa is or ready to do everything they can to collaborate with stakeholders to seek objectives by the space 50 and beyond. as well as to present the work of the office and the community

in our efforts to force peaceful corporation in outer space. the office will be organizing a series of three high level. space is a driver for socioeconomic sustainable development. it is being organized in collaboration with the government of the united arab emirates. it will be convened from the 20th to the 24th of november 2016 in dubai. it will facilitate a constructive dialogue between policymakers and stakeholders to address the impact of economic environmental, sociopolicy and regulatory dimensions of space. the forum will produce a declaration with a set of recommendations to shape and position activities for drivers for innovation, socioeconomic development for a sustainable future.

working with relevant stakeholders in addressing overarching long term development concerns, a road map towards space 2030 we give complete deliver wills of 2015 and beyond based on the space economy, space society, space accessibility and space diplomacy. space 2013 should help us to address the importance of space activities to fulfill the sustainable development goals and to be sure that while space research technology and applications are drivers for socioeconomic development, no one is left behind. thank you very much. >> thank you. [ applause ]. let's move along to the table. dave. >> good. thank you very much. and certainly it's a privilege to be here with you today and to be invited to this event.

and i want to commend very much the u.s. state department and secure world for bringing us together to discuss this very important topic and to -- i don't like the word socialize rg but i will use it. socialize the long-term sustainability guidelines. i share, i really hope this is the first of many such forums i am invited to by many countries as many of you probably know. it has 83 member states. we'll have 84 hopefully by the end of this year when hopefully new zealand joins us. this is important, thissest, that we need to make now to ensure that countries and states understand what we're doing and what the ramifications of these guidelines will be on i think all space actors in the future. as noted, we have reached a very

important milestone. it's been a long, hard road. and i want to give credit actually to the people who really started this. this started well over 10 years ago back when uni space 3 1999 when security and sustainability of outer space were put forward, brought forward by the chair of the scientific and technical subcommittee in the early 2000s. carl deutsche. and picked up again and really i think was very well developed by a gentleman who we have in the audience here when he was chair a decade ago that was supported by outer face affairs. he led a lot of that and of course has been picked up now by simonetta. so there are many fathers and

mothers of this process. and it has been a very sustained i think excellent collaboration. clearly a lot of -- you don't come to these agreements without some i would say challenges. and there have been challenges. those have been i think extremely well handled by peter martinez on my left, who will talk much more about the details. i really as claire would like the mentioned collegiality we found inside the committee on putting this together. now, we have 83 states. not all states have been fully engaged, i would say. all states have signed on. and that's very important. but states such as of course the u.s., the russian federation, japan, france, china, india,

germany, canada, brazil, i can go on. these are the leader who have come together week after week to really put these guidelines into the state we have them right now. and let us not underestimate the importance of these guidelines. these are really, i believe, going to change the way that we work in space collectively and globally. now, it is appropriate they come through copious, the only platform that we have to discuss the these times of issues. as simonetta has mentioned, we are under take thing an evaluation of the agenda of copious to ensure issues dealing with long-term sustainability, dealing with the other priorities that simonetta has

mentioned really start -- we start to address those in a very open way over the next decade leading, as simonetta said. now, one way of looking at long term sustainability and the way i like to look at them is using the term that others could change tcm transparency and confidence building measures. this term came out of a u.n. group of governmental experts that met about four, five years ago. and their report was agreed by the general assembly and is now being followed. we have to -- and i think that the term is very apropos. we really have to start working

on much more transparency and need to build confidence amongst. various actors. we hear on a regular basis about the congested nature of space, how it is contested. how it is competitive, and how it is is vulnerable. and there's not really a week that goes by without some issues that are being -- need to be dealt with on a fairly high level in order to ensure that we do not make a mistake and we have a really bad day up in the -- up above us. these transparency and confidence building measures have to some extent been used of a number of years now to develop a number of forums not only long-term sustainability, forums where one can obtain -- one can get major states together to

discuss coordination of their activities in key areas where we're leading in space. i mentioned a few of them because it has been, i would saw, a relatively successful decade of starting to build this confidence. i mentioned the interagency space debris coordination committee. 13 major agencies that get-together and a great detail discuss the way that space debris is being tracked, is being handled, is being mitigated. most of you know about the ibc guidelines, the guidelines that nonbinding guidelines that sort of guide space actors as to how to mitigate against more, adding to the space debris. we have, well, a very classic one is the international space station. that has built confidence amongst the major states in operating toge i