and they point out key things like legislation, which is also our business. when the agency has so many months to react, we try to highlight that because that is a key component of information. again, we also keep track of the legislative history, so we will add that on to the end. and then we have these presidential shot -- signing statements that have been in the news lately. here is the old weekly site. now we are doing a daily, as you mentioned. . .

this document has been in tabulates -- encapsulated in an envelope and if there is any change in this electronic file, then the signature on the document will become invalid. you can test that by be complete -- by simply being online and clicking on the certificate. if it has been altered, it will not show that it is valid. if you want to e-mail this to somebody and say i have the authentic gollel version of the law, if you will be able to do so. you can go online and see that this file has not been altered. why is that important? pdf files -- easily changeable. we have electronic publications. libraries are dropping hard

copies. it is important to have certainty as to what the law is. thus, digital authentication. this will be mailed out to every publication this year in a few weeks. they all carried this little insignia. curious cases. we do not have a lot of time. i want to mention some of these. maybe we should have started with what is a law. this leads to a discussion points. article one, section seven. it requires concurrence of both house and senate. b, it has to be presented to the president. it seems simple enough. down here we have our guiding principles, which is certainly try to establish a month starr's staff when i was the general counsel over there.

we look to the constitution when we have to make tough decisions. we keep in mind that the federal registration is dedicated to transparency and openness. that is how we started and that is what we are about. we do not want anything to go on behind the scenes that is not publicly recorded as lawmakers. this i am going to call the medicare bait and switch. this was a piece of legislation. we're talking about the lawmaking process. a bill goes back and forth between houses and goes into conference. in this case, the poor senate clerk failed to make a little change to the dow -- to the law. this involves medicare is essentially extending coverage for 36 months rather than 13 months. either a $2 billion shortfall or savings depending on how you

look at that. a savings if it does not go into law and a shortfall if you want medicare payments extended. so now the two bills are clearly different because of this error. the one that went through the house have the extension. the one that went to the senate did not get changed. the president signs the bill from the senate. saves $2 billion. the republicans who are on that side to begin with say yeah. we have saved money. lawsuits fly all over the place. everybody who might be affected files suit. lots of law professors write articles. we publish the law as a law. we are very cognizant of field v. clark. the supreme court said that the signature of the presiding

officers of each house is final , unimpeachable, despite the fact that there is no argument about the fact that these are two different versions that did not get past by both houses as the same bill. here comes the 2008 bill. the democrats are in charge. you think things might have changed. no. people make mistakes. there is a printer and the house that makes malfunctions, so while they are going, they have got regular parchment and some glitch happens, the printer and title 3 drops out. this is a food for peace act which is not entirely non- controversial. the bill sent to president bush -- remember, when the bill goes to conference report is generated.

the white house staff says everything looks fine and we are going to -- but we do not like the dollar amount. we are going to veto it. congress goes and overrides that. the farm bill -- everybody has got a stake in that. i think that was the first veto override of president bush. after the fact, we have a powwow with congress. if this were a contract, everybody had a mutual understanding and everybody thought we were passing the entire farm bill. it is just a printing error. the president intended -- it was presented to him any fact. our point of view is we are not want to slip title 3 into the bill. the bill has to be reintroduced.

we considered reintroducing only the missing title three but the food for peace act involves foreign aid and that may not go through on its own. the entire bill with title 3 included goes through the entire process again and the congress overrides the president and we publish both versions, killing lots of trees. now, this one -- i know i have got the papers somewhere, but this is from memory. in this case, it was not controversial. it had to do with the defense appropriations. something falls out of the bill. congress ends up noticing this error. to make up for that, it passes the entire bill, but to save money, but two of the archivists treat it as though the first bill was never enacted.

just published the second one. that keeps everything under the radar. this is a specific directive. it is hard to define the congress but that is what we did. our position was in reading this directive that they really had knocked -- had not amended the basic law. you cannot change the definition of the law. that is in the constitution. we published both bills. i am sure that would make some people happy. our principles are transparency and accountability and the evidentiary record. the line-item veto bill. this was a little different scenario here. you remember there was this unholy alliance between president clinton and newt gingrich.

both of them agreed they wanted to chop down the size of the deficit, and in order to do that congress is willing to give clinton a line-item veto which is not found in the constitution. alatas to constitutions have this provision for a governor -- a lot of state constitutions have this provision for a governor. we have this game whereby they president -- the bill is signed as usual, we published this as a slip law, but the president gets another chance at this and can cancel certain lines. it publishes these in the federal register. i have one there. this involves other publications from the regulatory side and the law-publishing side. initially, there was question about should we go into the law and do a strike through?

put in notes? we put in notes about cancellations. again, the lawsuits flight and professors vent about whether this is legal or not. with the congress is doing is selling to the president -- what the congress is doing is saying to the president here is a chance not to spend money. i just have to publish this notice and say you are not going to spend the money that is appropriated. isn't that an executive function to allocate the budget, including holding it back? the supreme court says no. it was not one opinion. there were some concurring opinions. essentially, they found this violates the presentment clause. you get one chance to get the whole thing. sometimes we have enormous appropriations bills.

they plop them on the president's desk. i remember reagan during a speech one time with the actual bill on his desk. it was this tall. this court says no. you cannot go back and authorize the president to take legislative action after the fact. he should have cut it out before. the various constitutional issues there -- separation of powers, delegation. we still have these artifacts saying that the president did this and it is still in the law books. the supreme court did not say never. the way it was done was not acceptable. enrollments -- these of the strangest things we will ever encounter. during the last six days of the session, congress is rushed for time. this feeds into the idea of the

appropriations bills. there are 13. defense related. medicare and social security. there is a role that congress can suspend the normal production process and cut and paste everything together. the technology that we thought we had left behind a 1970's with a paste pots sandy hand and notations come back. -- with the pace potts and the hand and notations come back. -- paste pots and annotatios come back. it is not a regular law. there are also almost indecipherable handwriting in this bill. the story -- i believe i saw this with my own eyes. someone ordered pizza on the side of the law, the phone

number, and that was in the law. we had blinders on that and we did not see that. our job is to do a true enrollment of this even though it was not properly enrolled in the first place. and every single keystroke. so we do not do note -- that e- file. we have to enter that ourselves. fortunately, this is mostly a thing of the past. they can do post-enrollment certification, wait too complex to go when to. finally, a few references to do online resources. that is our federal register page. some of the house pages. there is my contact if you have the general federal register questions. and questions on our new fdsys,

which we are inaugurating. any questions that anyone has? yes, sir. >> federal register -- second slide. we back to the second slide. the federal register came into existence because there was no original source document for the panama canal bill which went all the way to the supreme court. two things -- and did not exist as a source document, plus it had been defeated and did not exist in law? >> this was in the age when the president, fdr, was in acting through the agency's legislation to control the economy. this involves state transportation of oil and gas. this was a civil liberties issue.

the president's agents could could go -- could go into any plant and make sure they were not transporting gas and of recording that in taking profits here and there. a complex process. along the way there were these borders that were issued. one of them repealed it prior peace but it was not realize generally by the lawyers -- a prior piece but it was not realized. when the case went to court, justice jackson after hearing the pleas about how he could not find the original regulation ordinance, sure enough, the justice department was ordered to come up with it and they could not find that. it was emblematic of the fact we have a common -- a chaotic system and we cannot find the

document. the government was extremely embarrassed. the case was thrown out. that is how we got the federal register. >> from your perspective, how influential have you found lobbyists to be, and in the examples of what you observed to be inappropriate lobbying at any stage of the process? >> i think i am going to dodge that one. if you have read the papers, there have been concerns that legislation was being drafted by outside interest groups. that is anyone's privilege to come up with a bill. you can come up with a bill and send it to a member of congress and say, i would like to see this enacted. i do not know that that is improper influence%. a presidential election all -- election commission, there may be some specific relation

between them and campaign contributions, but that is the old washington game, just more directly in fused into the system. the interesting thing is you might think it is professionally drafted, but staff often does not know how. the lobbyists often do know how. they may have a perfect bill, whereas congress passed to submit to the legislative council within looks at what the congressman or the senator wants to do and crafts the amendments. i think i will stick with that on the undue influence. >> we have the title "house a bill becomes a law -- the executive perspective." how would the prospective be

different if it was the legislative perspective? >> you would get a lot more insight discussion on what goes on in the committee and how the parliamentarians interact with the house and senate leadership. i think the house and senate parliamentarian -- unsung heroes. they do not get any publicity. if you watch carefully, sometimes you will see the leader lean over to waitperson. it used to be robert dove was a noted one. they would fisa of the process they are proposing for the senate recommiting a bill back to the committee, is that appropriate? if you look at something like the terror shall bouquets, public bills or private bill, -- at the schiavo bill, public bill or private bill, it was private,

but by the time it got out the door, and over to our office, we took a look at this and we saw there was quite a bit of policy language within the bill. they may have advised it was a private bill, but we decided it is on the other side. a public law. we publish that as a public law even though that was the last thing we wanted to get involved in. you get a whole lot more in- that discussion. -- in-depth discussion. >> is there a paper trail of the original bills a trip -- bill's introduction of language and the edits, or with that information appear in the conference report -- or with that information

appear in the conference report? >> they have a journal. they keep track of the actions taken. that is recorded in the congressional record. you can trace a living history of a bill as it is introduced and amended. it might be supplanted by another bill. there is sometimes a substitution. that is difficult to follow sometimes. there is a trail. difficult to track that online. now that the house -- i think the senate is using xml -- it is going to be much easier. they are individually captured now. you will be able to find them easier. finally, this is all kind of subsume that the yen. it makes a difference in terms of when the bill goes through.

there were cases about which bill was properly enacted. it all comes out in the wash because it does not matter at that point. you cannot look beyond the four corners of the document. the original marshall field case was people could go to the congressional record and say this is not right. that was not the bill that was introduced or voted on. the court says it does not matter. at the end we must have certainty. all the prior versions become moot. in the back? >> what is the legal a fact of a signing statement? >> good question. citing statements were not really common until the reagan administration when the attorney general decided that the view in the interpretation of the law was not being recorded anywhere

in particular. they made an effort to have a publishing company compile citing statements. that is not an official publication. we also began recording the signing statements. signing cannot overcome the language of the law. it can, however, affect the implementation of the law. there are a lot of scholars -- at the boston globe they argued that president bush was abusing this and effective -- and effectively nullifying the law and ordering them to disregard provisions. i have to say that this has been a presidential prerogative since the reagan administration consistently, especially when you have a provision that

purports to constrain the president's foreign-policy authority in some way. that the president feels it is inappropriate. both departments of justice and democratic are very likely to look at that as something that needs to be stated as a presidential prerogative will not be infringed upon. sure enough, president obama has issued a number of signing statements as well. guidepost as to how the administration will proceed -- if it were to go to court, it is pretty clear that there is no recision of the statutory language by virtue of the signing statement. >> when the constitutionality of a law comes into question, how soon can this supreme court come involved -- become involved?

for example, there were questions about violating the first amendment. >> effect -- if it is important they can specify that there will be expedited review, including at the supreme court level if they choose. the usual is that the plaintiff who has standing has to go to the district court. the federal district court. file a lawsuit. discovery is made and hearings are made before the courts and it works its way through up to the appellate level. none of these cases come to the d.d. -- d.c. circuit. instead up in various federal circuits. go to the supreme court in all delivered time. the supreme court often postpones decisions.

they can carry them over to the next term if they choose. it just depends on the issue. anyone else? aye thank you for coming and taking new -- i thank you for coming and thank you for helping us celebrate. >> thank you.

>> al-anon higher education and training information professionals tonight on "to communicator's." >> how we c-span funded? >> grants and stuff like that. >> public television. >> donations. >> i do not know. >> donors. >> america's cable companies created c-span as a public service -- no government mandate, no government money. >> coincide the supreme court to see the public places -- go

inside the supreme court to see public spaces. hear directly from the justices as they provide insight about the building. home to america's highest court, the first sunday in october. >> next, a portion of a conference on efforts to better prepare students for college and careers. the educational testing company and the education and consulting firm, america's choice, host this event. this is one hour and 20 minutes. [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio] [no audio] >> we are having audio difficulties with this event and we are working to fix the problem and hope to have this for you in just a few moments on c-span.

[no audio]

>> we are having a problem with the audio hosted by the american stores educational consultants. working to fix that and hope to have that on for you in just a moment. in the meantime, news that eric holder has name prosecutor john jerome to investigate cia -- john durham investigate the cia. he will investigate whether cia officers broke the laws. that decision coming as the obama administration unleashes cia treatment of terror suspects, that story from the associated press today. we are waiting for a technical problem to be rectified and we

will go back to the event we were showing on c-span. [no audio] >> we have fixed the problem and we take you back now to any event that is hosted by the educational testing company and the group "americas joyce." -- choice."

>> good morning. i am hesitant to interrupt conversations that executive leaders are having because those of the times you get a chance to do some innovative things or to network with each other. again, i just want to thank you very much for coming to the symposium. i think we had a really good day today. we started the day with the secretary. i think the core of what he spoke to us about was about understanding that we are really in a transformational change era. that is so important for all of us to help guide our groups through that change. i always use two quotations

about change. when i got from secretary riley in an earlier speech he gave. he and his wife for in washington, d.c. by the river and daystar a man with a t-shirt on. the front of it said "changes could." when you look at the back it says, but you go first. a couple of weeks ago, we were talking about change. in the paper was another wonderful quotation. it was a cartoon. it's as i am all for change as long as it does not affect the status quo. unfortunately, we note that that is where many of the people -- wonderful people that we work with dark. they are so focused on the

things they have been able to do. they are truly great. sometimes it is a little difficult to open your eyes and say, what else do we need to do? as we talked about yesterday, we understand the world is moving so fast. the education of our kids has got to catch up so stable be able to compete with their peers around the world -- so they'd will be able to compete with their peers around the world. this morning we are going to talk about change. i am sure you know the buzz has been in the air that we have got to raise the standards. if you reach for the top as the secretary would say, you are more likely to get there. unfortunately, most of the provisions are run the country would say if this time to look at standards and a different way. a good chunk of them, more than

46, have signed on to a review of what the next generation of standard should look like. we are going to start by having scott and irene talk to us about where we are with that conversation, which we believe this just so important. we expect i read to be with us in just a minute. scott assures us if she cannot make it on time he will carry through on the presentation. [laughter] then we are going to turn our attention to john daisy, a strong friend aact and "america's choice." he is going to focus on that, too, talked about getting it done and what we need to do resignation to make that happen. then, after that, we are going to turn our attention to over

the horizon. we know we are going to have a reauthorization. it is going to be very important for all of us given everything we are doing to turn our attention to what we need to do to make sure that we can keep the things that work with no child left behind. focus on what we need to have in the journey ahead. having said that, i am going to turn to you. scott is the deputy director of the council of state chief officers. he has been right in the middle of just about every conversation in education for a long time. he is going to give us a heads up in terms of standards. let's greece him.

-- greet him. >> good morning. we have a power point. it is with eileen hef, who is stuck on the train. -- with her, stuck on the train. i'd rather get into a conversation with you rather than just talking to you. i want to go back to the beginning. i live in fredericksburg, virginia. i took the train this morning. about one hour 10 minutes. sleep in the morning and work on the way home. if you have never been to fredericksburg, numerous civil war battlefields. agreed museum of history. i assume there is a mural that goes around the building that tells the history of fredericksburg. ought -- at the bottom at the beginning date told the artists

that we want to start at the beginning. the very beginning of the murals has "several building years ago, the earth was formed." we are not going back that far. we are going back a couple of years to where they started. when jean first came to the council as art director, his first address to the police -- when he first came to the council as a our director her first address was on standards. we had a long conversation about what that meant. did that mean national standards? did that mean we would look at common standards? we focused internally for a good long time. how would we do that? we did not want to turn -- to use the term national standards, because people think of federal standards.

we came up with a common core, including both the chief said the governor says the primary movers of this issue. they spent some time -- about one year ago -- developing a paper called the international benchmarking report. you can pick up in one minute. their research paper that you have seen on benchmarking. the first call to action was a notion that the state's many to come together and develop common standards -- the state's need to come together and develop common standards. we spoke to a memorandum of agreement that they would sign. what the common standards initiative would be all about. some of the key points that you

have probably heard about that this effort would be different than others. standards would have evidence -- they would be researched and evidence-based. they would see the standards. most of you know that they were leaked out before we intended to have them come out. not a problem. it has been a good thing -- a lot of comments. if you see that, there is a link on the english language arts document that has a link to our evidence based on writing. it is an interesting -- if you look at that, each one of those has a clear link to where you can find research to be college or career ready. they're standards in what they

expect from the students. i think that solly was here yesterday. -- sally was here yesterday. they facilitated the math and english language arts work groups and they were diligent about making sure what is included in the documents comes from evidence. there is evidence that this is a college-ready and it promotes career-readiness. not just any countries to use this -- we are talking hong kong and singapore and finland. high-performing countries that outperform the u.s. we have been very clear that collagen careered-readiness is a key piece of this document. this is the basis for what we do in the future. if you have seen those documents, we have gotten

comments that they are not specific enough. they're not meant to be specific at this point. all students who leave high school should be ready to enter college, and by college we mean credit-barringer entry level course without remediation. in two career and technical training which has most of you know, can be just as rigorous as freshman courses at the university level. they leave high school ready for that. it starts in earnest here in the next couple of weeks. building those collagen career standards. what those standards looked liked is up for debate. we had a great meeting in north carolina and a couple of weeks ago with a number of math researchers who spent some time talking about learning progressions. phil was there.

the conversation was a good one as we thought about what are the great spans and clusters. kids cognitively do not develop in neat little grades. maybe they are 1-2 or 2-3. i do not know the answer. to forgo questions about what they are going to look like, we are still trying to figure that out. we are getting into the development of what those standards look like. i do want to spend a little bit of a time talking about the process. do you want to do the process? i have left your slides here. i wanted to give to the overview of where we have been. where we are going? i do not know if we have publicly mentioned this, but the new standards after the second round of reviews will be out on the 14th of september. they will be at 330 day review.

we hope to get an immense amount of feedback. we get an immense amount from our internal feedback group. 60 pages. from the states we had another 300 pages. we have been reaching out to other groups. the nea, the aft. that has all been very helpful for our teams as they come back for a second version of the collagen career standards. that second version will come out in september. i hope we will get an equally robust amount of feedback. we believe that document open until the conclusion of arcade- 12 work. as that can -- of our k-12 works. as back concludes.

we will give some of our internal workings and then we will get some of your feedback on conversation and figure how we can engage you in our process to enter the work that we are doing. >> i apologize for my late arrival. when i got to the train station they told me my train was canceled, so i had to take a later train. i just want to start off where scott left this conversation, which is, what is the process for developing these standards? in terms of timing, as he mentioned, our official public draft will be out mid-september. there will be a 30-day comment period. that will be an opportunity for anyone and everyone to give us their sense of what they think

of what they msn what they like and what we should be examining to bolster these standards. i also hope that that provides an opportunity within states, within groups of educators, within districts to really take a look at those documents to say "is this the set of standards we really do hope that students have mastered once they exit high school? -- school?" we hope that many students will go beyond this, but if students have accomplished this set of knowledge and schools -- and skills, will they be ready for post secondary education and on a path to successful career? once we have released the standards and once we have been reviewed, we will begin our

work. they have one more round, perhaps two, depending on the comments. we will begin our work on the k-12 standards. having those developed for a first public draft. let me back up and talk a little bit about who is at the table and what sort of process we are using to -- using. we have built many checks and balances in to this approach. in defining the standards, we tapped three groups that have what we think is the best research base and a lot of experience in doing this work. that is act, achiever, and the college board. they had individuals on that very first standards development work group. we have also identified a pretty

long list of expert feedback reviewers. as the standards development corporation group has been putting draft together, they have sent those to those experts for a pretty quick turnaround. feedback. in addition, we have shared these documents in their developmental stages -with governors' offices and a number of national and content organizations who we thought could provide some very rich initial feedback and continuous feedback as we do our work. for example, we have been having conversations with the national council of teachers of english, mathematics ,the nea, -- mathetmatics, the nea, the fet. about 20, 25 superintendents and

other leaders within districts to provide feedback. we have been incorporated that as we go along. we also have been working on some of the communications aspect of this as well. we have a national forum on standards. many, many groups and acronyms you would know are represented as part of this national forum and you have had both face-to- face meetings with these groups as well as e-mail communication to say that this is what is happening. what are your thoughts? here is what is coming. your members are key to making this work successful. finally, importantly, we have an expert validation committee. the role of this delegation committee will be to validate not only the content of the

standards -- these are the folks that are going to look at that evidence space and look at the final standard and say "to the scene right? -- do these seem right?" -- but they also adopted final standards. we have not named the validation committee that. the invitations are out to those potential members at the moment. the way that we identified those folks was we asked states -- a lot of members of our national forum to nominate people to that committee. we had a group of sex -- of six. they reviewed this list. they made the decision on who to be invited to the validation

committee. we will announce that soon. they are giving invitations and deciding if they want to take on this important task. that is the process. one thing that i want to make sure to underscore its we have and development of standards and getting these standards right. that is important and that is unnecessary. we want the right targets and expectations. we also recognize that even if we had the most perfect standards document in the world, that is just the start. the real challenge is in the implementation of these standards. do the teachers have the instructional strategies that will help the kids get to these standards? do they have the supports that they need and the resources? are we training our teachers to

help them be successful and teach students to be standards -- to a decent standard? are we sending the right messages with our assessments about what is expected? do we have a system of assessments that helps to give us information on longer the way, and not just at the end about where students and a teaching and learning is doing quite well and where it falls short, and where we need to improve? do we have the instructional materials that are going to be helpful in this effort? i want to acknowledge that there are a lot of the implementation questions. there are a lot of instruction questions that surround this. we are beginning to have many of those conversations with the number of groups that we have mentioned, plus others. we have meetings with the publishers.

we have had conversations with folks about how to use open source. we are trying to be at this point as expensive and creative as possible about what we need to do in order to make this effort. not just the writing of the standard by to help kids make the standard successful -- but to help make the standard successful. one other thing i do want to mention -- i think this might come up. ascot referenced, we had 46 states signed the memorandum -- as was reference, we had 46 states signed the memorandum. that was to participate and seriously consider the adoptions -- the standards to be adopted. the conversation, based on both what sort of structure we have in each state, who house to approve the adoption of the

standards, that is going to look different in each state and that is an important conversation as we get to final standards if they want to adopt. and what particular considerations are to each state. now really -- now i really will conclude my remarks and will be happy to take comments or questions. sure. [inaudible] do you want to take that one? >> when using the "philosophy," could you help us out? our own internal philosophy? >> which is our mantra? >> i think -- we have spent a lot of time -- 1 mile wide, 1

inch deep. i took my middle school, mime newly-minted middle school student -- my newly minted middle school student to school. it has been a long time since i have been in middle school. i forgot what we do to kids. how much stuff we put in the middle grades. there is an immense amount of curriculum that is taught k-12, but we start getting into 5, 6, 7, 8, there is a lot. one of the things i have talked about -- we said that the parents need to be able to understand what their students were expected to do. students could not only articulate what was in the standards but be responsible for their own learning.

those standards should be able to be communicated to the policymakers about what was essential for the students to know about -- in order to be ready for college or career. the thing that has led us is we said no state would never have a reduction of the current standard. we needed to make these few are so the teachers could teach the curriculum as opposed to having to race and not really spend time going deep into the curriculum of what those war. -- those were. fewer, clearer, so we could articulate that to the parents and the public. if you look at those standards, i think they are clear. i think they are fewer. i think you will see an expansion. more specifics that the individual grade levels. we want to make sure that we were not only cover in the

essential content but going deep and allowing teachers and the administrators to think about what was essential for students. one of the things i was interesting about the "fewer" aspect is it does allow the teachers to think about much more robust than much more deep -- and more more deep learning. evidence-based. we have stuck to that mantra. evidence and research-based. when you look at what singapore does, we new look at -- the first standard on the right team actually has six different countries has a very similar standard. singapore, hong kong, taiwan. you can go down -- it is a robust set of standards. we did not just throw out things that we thought were important.

we focused on the essentials. that has driven the philosophy behind, what is in there and why? >> cms? >> [inaudible] in my lifetime this level of standards, so i commend you for that. are you also planning on parallel working towards national assessments, because we do know that this is just the beginning. we know that assessment tries instructions. how hopeful argue that the states will actually adopt these national standards, understanding that they will have to revise state assessment to match the standards, which is a very expensive proposition. i am wondering the incentive for

them to be able to do this. is the federal government going to be supporting the development of these new assessments to match the standards? >> when we had the meeting in chicago with 37 states represented, one of the things that particularly the state superintendents emphasize -- and we gave them a draft memorandum. they said, we do not see assessment in here. this is not going to be real unless assessments are linked to these. on their urging, we added the second phase. to develop assessments. i think that the state leaders recognize exactly what you are saying. in terms of support for this, we do have what duncan announced

for the development of a common assessment. that begins the conversation with resources on the table. we know that if we develop a rich and robust system of assessments, it is going to cost more than that. . we are looking at the parameters

of the $350 million. my vague answer will be sooner rather than later. we also know that states and districts have cycles. this is not something that can be done overnight. this is why we need to start having these conversations right now. just another clarification in terms of timing -- the memorandum that the states signed doesn't say that states will seriously -- that states signed does say that states will seriously consider adoption. on the other hand, we do not want to write the standards and have the state's dragging for 15 years before they decide to adopt.

that is why we moved for the three-year marker. >> [unintelligible] >> that is a question for you. >> we have had a lot of conversations with the department and the hill staff and keeping them abreast of where we are at. the secretary has been very supportive of this. we went up on the hill a couple of weeks ago, before the winter recess, and shared with a number of them where we are at. they very supportive in looking for ways to include support of the common core and figure it weighs exactly -- and figure out

ways exactly to your point on ayp. will there be an ayp window? will it even matter if they go growth-centric? i saw you club, but i do not know everybody else's opinion. there is a growth model component that they may need to move towards for everyone. if it moves in that direction, then the ayp question will be addressed to there. -- will be addressed in thether. i guess that stay tuned is the short answer. we have been very cognizant to make sure they are in the loop all the way along so that we do not get blindsided and vice versa downstream when states start to adopt and billing to

the implementation phase of this work. >> we have time for one more question. >> [unintelligible] >> yes. we have already been talking with a number of the science groups. we want to get this right. but science and social studies are definitely on our radar and we have begun the some of those conversations. -- have begun some of those conversations. >> i have two questions. first, why would the national school boards or any administrative group not part of the secondary group? were they a part of the forms? secondly, i guess it is the same question. is there any fear, as we move

more and more toward federal entanglement, that we infringe on the state amendment that says that education is the right of the states? >> the national state boards of education>aasa, -- the national state boards of education, aasa, we understand that those are important constituents to be a part of this conversation. we have had them on the national forum and we have shared some drafts with some of those groups. we have gotten written feedback, not from all, but, i know offhand, secondary school principals and i think we have gone some from aasa. in response to your question about the state leadership for

this work, we have tried to be very clear from the outset that this is a state-led initiative. there is no federal money that is going into the development of the standards. there is no federal representatives sitting at any of the tables. we have not asked them for feedback on the standards. this is truly a state-led initiative. in fact, the secretary acknowledges, when he made his acknowledgement about the three and a $50 million, that this would not be something that is run by the -- about the $350 million, that this would not be something that is run by the federal government. i represent the governor's. -- i represent the governors.

scott represents the [unintelligible] we agreed that this has to be a state-led initiative. >> this is a voluntary effort. at the end of the day, when these standards come out, if they take a look at them and say, sorry, we cannot sign on, there is no penalty if you walk away. we hope that nobody does that. we actually think that these will be significantly rigorous enough that states will look at them and say that this is the right thing to do. but, at the end of the day, if you think that this will not move the bar for us, then it is voluntary and states are free to say that it has been a nice ride and we are out of here. we hope that does not happen. the federal money, as it relates to the assessment, is a nice bonus. it is a nice incentive for the states to get involved and for

the states to adopt i am understand how the coal mangling -- for the states to adopt. i am understand the concern of the commingling. we have talked about what is a border some kind of agency, a private-public partnership look- alike that is the managing agent long-term. all of those things are still up for consideration as we move forward. >> so this is a state-led initiative and 46 states have signed on. what if you're one of the four states that have not. what opportunities will there be? >> 47 states have now signed on.

missouri just signed on primarily because they were in a transition between gov. come aboard, and there chief state school officers. now that everybody is on board, they have joined. the ones that have not joined our south carolina, alaska, and texas. in two of those states, it is a political issue. in one, texas, it is an issue of the board in they could not -- and they did not think that they could get the board to adopt. we have said all along, if you want to come into this thing downstream, if you take a look at the next version of the standards and said, oh my gosh, we missed the boat and we want to get in, we will let you in.

gimcracks, the chief in south carolina, was actually one of the members who helped select your validation panel. there are opportunities both that the policy level and even in the development phase for folks from ththose states to bea part of the discussion of how things transpire. we will not exclude them if they make that decision downstream. >> in response to your question on how can we be involved even through the purview of the state, we have these available for public comment. you may be a member of an organization providing feedback. there are opportunities to weigh

in and get more information through some of those entities if you're in a state that is participating in this fully at the moment. >> now that there's a new governor in alaska, may be that changes things, too. [applause] [laughter] >> i want to thank fill their road -- i want to thank phil dero. they have been working very hard and they have been revealing mounds of feedback and gary knapp -- they have been reviewing mounds of feedback and gary knapa hearinggearing up. [applause]

>> i do not want to put you on the spot, but would you like to say a few words about your involvement? phil has been involved in the development of standards for a very long time >> it might be interesting to understand how evidence was used to construct the standards in mathematics -- that is the ones i know. it is interesting to see how they different from typical state standards. we were warned that we have a bad habit of having a curriculum that is a mile wide and an inch deep. you heard a little bit about this yesterday. act had more data and evidence that we could use than any other single source. they really do have a research

base that i recommend, too, that any states should use. the college faculty were pretty clear if you look at what they thought was important. they wanted a deeper understanding and a more robust proficiency with the fundamental ideas of advanced mathematics. they did not want -- they were clear about this, too -- coverage of lots of advanced topics. when you ask the high school teachers, they think the colleges want lots of advanced topics and they do not want deeper understanding and proficiency of the fundamental ideas. this is consistent with what we saw. when you look at the actual standards from places like singapore and so on, you see it

there, too. last topic and more depth. -- less topics and more depth. there is no textbook in any of those asian countries that has more than 150 or 160 pages per year. we have, what? 900 pages. no matter where you look, you see the same message. when you look at the state standards compared to the singapore standards, for example, our state standards have been far more in them. states have to get used to what fewer means. it means more focused and more depth. how did we get our focus? we would come upon a topic and see that all 50 states had in their standards. then we will look at the

achievement data and see less than 20% in the kids are learning it. something is wrong. all of the states are teaching it, but hardly any of the kids are learning it. this better be important. we have to spend more time on it. that means we have to cut something else out. then we started looking at how important is it to college faculty. they said -- if they said that it was not important, then it became a strong candidate to come out. then we looked very much -- we were not just cutting things out. we were looking for the coherent. the evidence help us get that coherence. sometimes things are in there just because they are mathematically essential for the coherence. all in all, this is a different

process than what you typically go through to get state's standards. i want to complement the governors and the chiefs for setting up a process that was not political. we were not try to get agreement. we were trying to design something that would work for teachers. the assignment could have been, can you come out with a set of standards, kind of the consensus standards of what the states already have? in other words, a grand celebration of the status quo -- they did not say that. they said it was time to take the next step. states are ready to take the next step. we want a state-led effort to define what the next step is. that is what the standards are. states are expecting to see a validation of what they have already done. i must compliment the states that they took this at face

value and interest in what would look -- they took this at face value and took a look at what was going on. the way these guys were, that means they want to be done by christmas. that is not much time. >> [unintelligible] the price that our kids and country are paying in the achievement gap between the united states and other countries, i would like to say that you guys are fabulous to be leading this effort, the governors and the chiefs, a leading this effort to give our kids this opportunity. i want to applaud you for all of this effort. [applause]

>> i would also like to convey congratulations from colorado. we are working in a systemic way with many moving parts at once. keeping in mind the assessment and of it, if the and the game is to actually move the needle on the things we care most about, to say how we compare internationally, and pay attention to how ayp will be reformulated, where it is the grain size and are we down to the individual student -- what is the grain size and are we down to the individual student. and just then atta boy is what i am offering.

>> we have been asking questions of but what will this mean for nape in the future. we do not have the answers yet. i think we're getting a lot of good questions. a point has been made about what are we measuring and how are we measuring it and not only how states are doing internationally or the country on average but can we get deeper into that information. i think these are tough, but important questions. if we can use a lot of this to leverage teaching and learning and giving kids more opportunities to be globally competitive, we're going to be in a much better shape. >> i do not want this to be a

mutual admiration society. your crew in colorado, your review help us immensely on getting the assessments on the table. eileen mentioned it briefly. assessment is a key piece. we also said that we really wanted to make sure that the work we do not only relates to new forms of assessments, but the new forms of teacher training and development. without those two pieces -- we can create the greatest and it's in the world and the greatest assessment that tells us a lot, but if we do not have the resources on the ground with teachers in the classroom and a curriculum that translates these standards, then we have missed a another huge -- missed another huge opportunity. thank you for all of your work. >> in terms of where the chiefs

are -- for five years ago, when this conversation a rose with of the chiefs, -- when this conversation arose with of achievethe chiefs -- this is a r indication on how much a growing has taken place. this was a heated topic when it for started four years ago. you could cut it down the room in terms of people who said that they did not want any part of this. this is very exciting stuff, really exciting work. but have that many chiefs and the governors sign-on and have it be strictly voluntary, just to set that context a little bit

more into how much of this has really escalated in the last year's is truly phenomenal. when we met in chicago and we saw the synergy in the room in terms of how soon could we do this, it is an extremely tight timeline, no doubt about it. and arkansas, -- in arkansas, we had our english-language dockets this summer. we changed that for this sole purpose. our teachers were very appreciative of that. there was no reason for us to go through that again and have to come back a year-and-a-half later or whatever and have to do the whole scenario over again thank you guys for being here. >> can i ask you one question before you switch? >> yes in. >> -- >> yes.

>> if we're looking at kids going to college, the act is fundamental for them. why cannot we use that as a national test instead of spending money in developing new things and using that money for other things? >> as you know, the standards are not complete yet. the level of alignment, we cannot say. obviously, the college board and act were at the table. they came with their data. both organizations have learned an enormous amount through administering those tests over the years. as you mentioned, as we open up

the assessment conversation, i think that your question is an important one to have on the table and discuss. what is the assessment? how can it look? how can it be changed or modified? i think that is an important consideration. one other thing i would like to add i is that some of the conversations are from some of -- or with some of the higher and institutions. something that is not working well for k-12 and post secondary education is that when they go through their k-12 career and they do fine in their state tests and then show up at a post secondary institution, there is remediation. that is like giving them good information. that is not telling them truly how they doing if they want to

go to college or a technical school, etc. how can we send better signals to students and to teachers through the k-12 system about what is expected in order for kids to go without meeting remediation? thank you for the question. >> thank you irene and scott. this is a very important topic today. we are virtually all in this together. that says a whole lot a lot of our questions this morning have been of brown and the -- have been around the assessments part. we have asked the director of federal policy for the democrats for education reform to talk to us about accountability systems

and what might be in the wind as we move forward. again, the first part that we have to get done right is a clear understanding of what we have to be able to do. the companion question is how to assess that. charles. >> thank you, packard thank you, all, for being here -- >> thank you, pat. thank you, all, for being here. i want to leave time for questions to get feedback from you all. the democrats for education

reform has been up and running for a few years. it is new york-based. it was started by folks in new york city who were involved in school reform there, primarily charter schools. they had run into some political obstacles in terms of expanding their charter schools or getting public school space. they solid there were politics involved in this. i think i am probably going to talk more about politics than most people who have spoken here. that was the genesis for democrats for education reform. as an organization, we are interested in a broader range of issues, teachers, assessment, standards, turning around struggling schools, data systems. we are much broader now. let me just state what i have done in the last 15 years.

i started out as a direct service provider for special- education children. in 1993, i went to capitol hill and worked for senator paul simon. that is where i became aware of pat harvey. then i went on to work for congressman george miller . do not throw anything, but i was his point person on no child left behind. it is a bad brand now. i am sure that the name will be changed. one thing that we love about pat when i worked for senator paul simon is that we saw people coming in and say that we cannot do this with title 1 and we cannot do that with a title line and we said, go talk to pat

harvey. pat harvey was "yes we can" before it was even fashionable. [laughter] i'm going to try for candor today. this is just to get some discussion going. you all can react to that. i have been doing this for a while. there are some political pitfalls to this. i think imga and the -- i think that mga and gates and of these folks are headed in the right direction. this is an historic opportunity. these are things that people have been talking about for a long time. the fed just put out $95 million for public schools. in a lot of cases, that still leaves a budget holes.

in some cases, it is necessary to do that. democrats for education reform, we kind of consider that the cost of doing business. that was general aid to education. we see the $400 billion as assessments of driving education reform. it lacks $100 per kid in the united states. and a lot of these things are not necessarily going to cost money. they could have a better use of money out there.

we see it as venture-capital. it is a voluntary program. i think your answer to folks is that, if they feel that this is when to compel them to do something they not going to do, do not apply for the money. this is a competitive program. it is not supposed to go up as a formula to the states, $90 per kid in the united states, and i think we see title won a little bit that way. it was never meant to be general aid to education. it was meant to serve for minority kids, l.a.p. kids, and neglected kids, a delinquent kids. we're trying to reforest this it on the original program for

title one that started in 1965. this is my third round with the assessment standards reform issue. when i came to the hill in 1993, it was a little like it is now. everybody was talking about health care. every fellow in my pool wanted to be out there. i had come from a setting where i was doing research and intervention in the schools. so i did education. then president clinton's esea summit, in which mga was very involved, all the things that are federal law now that people are very aware of, standards, assessments, ayp, they were all in that long. they got tightened, to say the

least, in 2001. but there were all in there. i was cleaning out my office last weekend, not even looking for things for this presentation, and i came across a washington post editorial for 1994 appeare. it was all about how this was going to be the time when we were going to set world-class standards and have aligned assessments. and it did not turn out that way. i think it was a good start. probably, politically, it was important to start there. but i think that context is important to keep in mind. in 2001, we heard similar things from the bush administration and people on the hill. there was no way that we were going to pass national standards and national assessments. those things had been defeated

before. the whole gist of everything was that we were going to have these state tax and nape. we were going to compare nape to the state pass. a lot of people were not even aware that some of the state tests had been rescaled. this is the third time around. that is for me. there had been efforts before that. i think it is important to get it right this time. let me tell you about what we think is important in terms of the standards. we believe that they need to be vertical, meaning not only the standards, but that teaching to back it up.

good assessments, that is another block that we have been around a couple of times. all of the things that people want in terms of assessment are in law, that they'dthey be mult- level and not multiple choice. we can have a discussion about why it has not happened. is it the money? is it the political process? just having those policies in place on paper are not going to necessarily mean that they have been on the ground. you need the teaching. you need the assessment. you need the curriculum. you need the support for schools to turn around. you need the money. i think there a way to put guidance out on the money that obama put out next week.

california has some of the highest standards in the country. delaware is somewhere in the middle. but a look at the black kids in delaware and four kids in the lower end lap kids in delaware, they do better than the whole population in california on average. if you look to the averages for black kids, for poor kids, and for lap kids in delaware, they do better than the whole state of california on the nape. i do not think that height is necessarily sufficient. if you look at delaware, they have the advantage of being a small state. they can coordinate.

i think that california needs to be broken up into 10 areas. [laughter] they have had some really good people there. we can talk a bit deeper with rogue states. if someone wants to break out of this effort, we are not going to be upset about it. if somebody wants to move quickly, that is fine. common standards are absolutely necessary. new jersey has pretty high standards, but they have to set high school exams which drive the curriculum of the schools. if you take algebra in camden

or patterson or jersey city, it is not the elder brother a take in montclair -- it is not the algebra they take in montclair. and there is a different set of standards. california is the the same way. the mandate that you take a particular set of courses. in some schools, there are not enough class's for enough kids to take them. they line up for them. they are closed out of them. you can go to a high school where you are unable to complete the course work. once up all of this stuff up, it will not mean much -- once you lineup all of this stuff, it will not mean much.

i think we need to learn from past efforts to develop assessments. i think act is really committed to this and in trying to do things differently. in the past, we have heard all of this good rhetoric. when it comes down to a, a lot of vendors sell people the same product that is on the shelf in new packaging. [unintelligible] i like some of the open source tops. -- some of the open source it

taltalks. if they want to pick off some pieces and have this be unique, that would be fine. you would have some overlap. let me talk about accountability a little bit and i will try to wrap this up in five minutes from now. miller was the primary driver on accountability. again, do not throw things, but let me talk about what we think is important. one is comparability. it has to be common across schools and it has to be this aggregation -- has to be

disaggregation. in 2000, before ncib was passed, only six states were aggregated -- only six states disaggregated. one state did so for [unintelligible] i do not think that you can necessarily set the standards and then expected the political pressures will work out such a that you can narrow the achievement gaps. we were lobbied by california.

they have a system where expectations for poor minority children was 80% for everybody else -- was 80% compared to everybody else. the target they had for them was literally define at 80% of the rest of the population. they tried to lobbyists to accept their structure -- they tried to lobby us to accept their structure. i think you need time lines. we can argue about what they going to be. i think you need a time line because there was not one before. graduation rates, where you do not have an issue about and dumbing down, where you do not have accountability issues, where schools are going to be sanctioned, very few states have any kind of time lines for

graduation or that involves closing achievement gaps. i do not accept the argument that because you have ayp that is something that is driving down standards or that of a few lifted the standards, if everybody figures out how you get there, that there would be a timeline. it is a very different situation than tests. the measures have to be state- wide. you can compare kids from concord, calif. to kids from concord mass. -- concord, massachusetts. if you go to a local assessment, as some people have talked about, i think we have moved in another direction since last year, that is what you're going

to wind up with. i think we need to build support for everybody to do these things. there are $3 billion going out now for school improvement and states under title 1 are allowed to set aside 4% of their funds for school improvement. there is a cat in federal law of $500,000 per intervention. there may be a need to raise that cap. we think that growth models and the value-added are great, but we think there are problems with it. i think we are doing a disservice to the debate by saying that the goal really is 2014 -- 100% by 2014. i think that everybody looking at the accountability system knows that it is not. that is the rhetorical goal, but

it is mathematically impossible to have your annual measurement objectives met by 100%. you'd have to reduce the number of students that are not proficient by 10%. you'd have to get to 46% by next year. each year, he only have to reduce the number of students that are not proficient by 10%. seven years after the passage of the law, we still have headlines with schools saying that we do not how we will get there by 2014. our school will have to close. i do not know what people say that. it is not true. i challenge anybody in this room to get back to me with a mathematical scenario where they

can get anywhere close to 100% by 2014. if you were -- if you are at 90%, your goal for next year is 91%. i make people very uncomfortable when i talk about this. but i think everyone is doing a disservice to the debate when they say that. >> [unintelligible] >> excuse me? >> [unintelligible] >> that they have or have not? >> [unintelligible] >> stake or schools? >> schools. >> yes. the higher up you go, the less your expected to get. if you are really low, ran up quick. we can argue whether that is too

high or too low. that is illegitimate debate. -- that is a legitimate debate. should the growth be differentiated for schools that are different levels? i think you have to start with the facts. i wrote a paper this spring on this. some of these growth models are problematic. i will might get into the technical things, but there is a huge transparency problem. one of the things that has happened with the data it is that some groups have been able to take the data and have a discussion about what is to happen at their schools. i think there's an error in him -- and -- in human judgment that we have had before.

in tennessee, texas, ohio, and pennsylvania, their growth model goes through a complicated mathematical structure. instead of the proficient score, you have something that is on the way that you derived through this mathematical model. but nobody knows what the target is for any kid at any school because that is proprietary information. if i am a parent and i go into a school in tennessee and said, the school made ayp. why did my school ay matep -- what did my schoolschool make a? they cannot tell you. the states that are doing it this way, where they show you an

equation that is this a long and that the kids are on youtheir w, they going to be confused. when i was in school, they had sra. [laughter] i know that i am probably in the upper 10% in each year. we have a color coded box. -- in the upper 10% in each herage here. we have a color-coded box. you cannot do that under the standard model. in texas, you know that you are somewhere between red and purple, but you do know where

you are. it is not about me. i am just saying that transparency is going to be a key issue. i said, i was going to try to be candid. i think that everybody here wants the same thing. this is about kids, where they are -- i am not against being realistic about some of this. i know that everything is going to change. the law and going to be a lot different at the federal level than it is now. we do not know where that is going to be, but we have to start with the facts and a realistic assessment. not where we do not want kids to

be or a bad reality assessment, but what we do want and to be realistic. what is here and what is not. i will wrap up with that. >> we have time for it to questions. >> i will stand here as long as you want. i do not want to hold you up from going out to eat for getting coffee or whatever you want to do. ok. [laughter] [applause] thank you for having me. >> we are going to take a 10- minute break. then we will have john who will share with us a successful program. ok. >> c-span's coverage of the national health care debate continues tonight with wisconsin

democrat ron kind. tomorrow, it is live coverage of virginia democrat jim moran and his health care town hall. jim beam will join him. -- jim dean will join him. bill on line and follow the latest tweets on events. share with us your own citizens video. now we have a look at how women will be affected by some of the health-care proposals being discussed across the country. this is just over 20 minutes. host: terry o'neal is the new president of the national organization for women, making

her first visit on "washington journal" with us since being elected back in june. welcome. guest: thank you. host: what are you now biggest concerns over the health care debate that's happening now both on and off the hill now in this congressional recess? guest: i think there are two concerns. now has long supported single payer health care. we know that's not going to happen this year, but we do believe that single payer is really the best way to help women out of what is currently a broken health care system. we know the system is broken. it's particularly broken for women. and if i could just tell you a little bit about why it's broken for women and that will kind of explain where we're coming from with the current health care reform package that's going through congress. so women are getting it sort of from both sides of the health care industry. on the one side, women don't have a disproportionately -- we

don't have health care coverage. women are disproportionately represented in part-time work and it doesn't have health coverage attached to it and that's because women have childcare responsibilities, responsibility for caring family members who may be ill or elderly. in addition, women tend to be disproportionately represented in nonunion jobs that don't have health care and low wage and minimum wage without health care associated. on the one hand, we don't have access to health care insurance. host: right. guest: on the other hand, over the past 25 years or so, the health care industry has progressively been shifting health care responsibilities to unpaid family members of people who are ill. so over 25 years, you've seen this trend of people being sent home from the hospital, sometimes with tubes still in them that need to be tended to, wounds that need to be dressed

and redressed, being sent home from the hospital, and very often it's family members that are literally trained in the hospitals to take care of the person who's going home, and who is it that's really doing this care? it's women. on the one hand, we're doing a lot more, unpaid actual health care tasks and on the one hand, we don't have access to health insurance because of unemployment realities. so given that that's the case, the question is, what part of the health care reform going through congress now is good for women and what part is bad for women. the good parts are the preventative care. it seems it is a part of all of the health care bills that are moving through congress. and that's a very good thing. women utilize preventative health care. the annual check-up with your ob/gyn is a preventative thing. many women don't have access to that. women disproportionately experience die bites more than

men, so having preventative care will be wonderful for women. there are provisions to eliminate gender discrimination for similarly situated women and men. that's a good thing. but that leads me to a real problem that we're having, which is that reproductive health care services are being used as a political football, which is completely outrageous and there have been amendments to the health care package proposed that would prohibit the public option, assuming there is a public option, from providing health care, such as abortion, and in some cases, birth control . that amendment has not passed in the house committee, but it's there, and what's really outrageous is the idea that women's reproductive health care would be singled out for attack. host: now is upset over the

facts that the so-called essential benefits is designed here a page from the bill hr-3200, the house bill, the essential benefits. your concern is that you see reproductive health services as an essential benefit. you talk about abortion. and birth control. guest: absolutely. s.t.d. h.i.v. testing and treatment. that is a huge issue for women. h.i.v. is becoming -- again, disproportionately something that women and girls are affected by. host: terry o'neil with us. talk about now and health care and other women's issues. we'll get to your calls momentarily. on the health care debate, what are you hearing from members via e-mail, via twitter, via phone calls at now? what are they most concerned

about? you talked about some of your concerns. give us some of the anecdotal stories that you're hearing about. guest: women are concerned about attacks on limiting reproductive health services. many women are covered currently have that insurance and private insurance, health insurance. they are covered for a wide range of contraceptive services as well as abortion and they're afraid of losing it. members that i've spoken to are very concerned about moving back ward in that sense if some of these anti-reproductive rights amendments were to make it through. i think more broadly, what women are telling me, and i'm calling now members around the country. you know, what are you real concerns? what the now members are telling me is we want single payer health care and we want the single payer health care to be required to provide the full range of reproductive health services. i can't tell you how many women

i've spoke on the who said, i just got laid off and i don't have health insurance and i want single payer because i don't want to have to worry about that and they say i don't have health insurance for my kids because i just got laid off. host: let's hear from our viewers. breezeville, michigan. james on our democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a question about the health care debate. all i hear about is health care for white men and white women. how about health care for black men? young black men need health care, too. i hear nothing in the debate about helping anyone else besides the white and -- the white men of america. host: have you heard about health care? caller: no. it seems no one wants to care about the poor and needy of this country. host: thanks for the call this

morning. guest: i think it's a very good point. the bills that are moving through congress retain alliance on employment-related health insurance. in other words, the health insurance you get through your employer remains the core of the way we provide health care services in this country. services in this country. that excludes the people . insurance. and that is disproportionately people of color and women. the caller is absolutely of right to be concerned about that. host: manchester, new jersey. good morning, gloria. caller: i'm a senior. in 1965, i was widowed. i had five children. i provided a family plan to the youngest one. she was only 7 then, until she was 18. so my kids were well covered. as a matter of fact, i went many years without any claims. i was ready to give it up. however, my brother talked me into keeping it and my oldest son had a very bad accident.

thankfully i had it. all those years not putting claims in. however, now, you cannot buy that insurance in ng because the legislator won't let you buy it. it's crazy what they want you to buy that you don't need. so it starts with the government being the fault of the high coast cost of the insurance. god help this country. thank you. guest: yeah. the question of what gets covered and what kind of insurance plans can be bought into, i'm not knowledgeable enough about new jersey law to know where the issue is there, know where the issue is there, but i have to say, single payer answer to that. medicare for all. you have one set -- you have a provider and it has rules. host: what sort of plan do you provide for the employees of now? guest: well, we have comprehensive health care. our employees do contribute to part of the policy. but all of our employees are

covered by health care. host: terry o'neil, a graduate of north western. took over now in june. broadening this out more than health care, what are some of your priorities for the organization? guest: we are going to be rolling out national action campaigns, which are not focused on a particular federal legislation, but rather at community level organizing around issues that really are important to women. one of the national action campaigns that we're going to roll out will be advocacy for single payer health care. we view the current health care reform bill as an incremental step toward what women really need, so we will be doing a very -- we think it's very important to get out there with an education and awareness campaign. also the equal rights amendment. in many states the debate is heating up. we think it's time to jump in and demand equality for women in

the constitution. and we'll be working on equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. host: let's go to paris, arkansas. good morning to frank on our independents line. caller: thank you, and good morning to both of you. there are some wonderful -- i have a different perspective on health care. 10 years ago, a medication actually stopped my heart. there's a wonderful herb called wolf berry that is under a lot of research. in fact, in new york they've just discovered a university hospital in new jersey that this wolf berry is actually inhibiting the growth of human breast cancer cells. so alternative medicine is something i don't hear. wonderful information site. gojitrees.com.

host: savannah, georgia is up next. guest: good morning. caller: good morning. there must be some option for the vast majority of americans to afford insurance, because even after you have insurance, people are paying for insurance and cannot afford to pay to use it. you have co-payments for medications that are $50 each, and if you have six prescriptions, how much is that coming out of your budget? or you have to pay the co-payments for the insurance. the prepaid that come with it, you've got to meet the deductibles to go to the hospital and the doctor and everything, but you're paying $700 and $800 a month. so you're paying three times. host: is that it? caller: that's it. i want to know why people feel

like they have a right to complain. maybe they can afford to use their insurance or they can afford their insurance. but what about the cross section of people who cannot? host: thanks for the call. guest: you know, that's exactly -- the caller has laid out exactly the problem. women who are laboring under a wage gap, 78 cents on the dollar -- host: has that improved over the last 10 years? guest: very little. maybe it was 76 cents at the beginning of the bush administration. latinas, 46 cents. it's really an outrage. with women having less access to wealth building because of the wage gap and less income because

of the wage gap, we have less ability to pay those $50 co-pays for the medication, and yet we have higher incidents of the kinds of disease that require those monthly medications. diabetes medication and heart decide medication. host: on the wage gap, what sort of specific legislative actions can be taken to sthrange gap? guest: we know what needs to be done. nobody wants to talk about it. the reality is it's comparable worth legislation that needs to be done. we have an equal pay act in place. the equal pay act demands that women and men must be paid the same for the same job for doing the same job. the problem is that the vast majority of workplaces in this country are severely sex segregated. so you go into a factory, you have one line that's almost all women, you have another line that's almost all men. which one do we think has better access to promotion? well, it's the men's line. which one has higher pay?

well, it's men's line. yes, they're doing different jobs. what you need is a comparable worth legislation that requires companies to pay people in accordance with the level of education required for the job, the level of experience required for the job. host: wouldn't more women in management over time eventually sort of see that and reduce that gap just on their own with more women in positions of management and influence? guest: yeah. over centuries maybe with a lot of work. truly, more women in management, it's just so painfully slow. women constitute currently less than 10% of the boards of directors of the fortune 500 companies. so we're not going to get anywhere close to that any time soon. it's important to understand, that glass ceiling that keeps women out of those very top management levels, it's not made of glass. it's made of people making specific policy decisions for these very large corporations. host: we have in connecticut,

next up, good morning to william on our republican line. caller: my concern is i've been watching a lot -- my party, they're using misinformation and i believe the insurance companies are -- people are badgering our u.s. senators -- i would not do that. i'm bipolar. there's no way i would badger or heckle a senator. my concern is we need to fix the health care problem and something needs to be done. why both parties will not get together and make out the best program possible. make put some safeguards in for research and development. host: what specific efforts has now made in terms of trying to influence the debate? what sort of presence at town halls, etc. ? guest: we have urged our members to go to those town halls and to

talk about using the reproductive health care as a political football and also to talk about the importance of retaining a public option. we do feel that the current plan needs to have a public option, particularly because the current plan, again, puts employment-related health insurance at the center of the plan, which disproportionately women don't have access to. so we really need that public option. host: i wanted to bring your attention to yesterday's sunday "new york times magazine." the entire issue is devoted to women's issues, why women's rights are the cause of our time is front page headline of the magazine. i'll open it up just a piece from one of the many articles on here. the u.n. estimated that there are 5,000 honor killings a year in the majority muslim world. they write, the girls vanish partly because they don't get the same health care and food as boys. in india, for example, girls are less likely to be vaccinated that be boys and are take on the the hospital only when they are

sicker. the girls in india from 1 to 5 years of age are 50% more likely to die than boys their age. in addition, ultra sound machines have allowed a pregnant woman to find out the sex of her own fetus and then get an abortion if it's female. the global statistics on the abuse of girls are numbing. it appears that more girls and women are now missing from the planet precisely because they are female than men were killed on the batting field in all of the wars of the 20th century. so with a new administration in power and with a female woman heading the state department, how should u.s. priorities on women's issues internationally change? guest: the secretary of state hillary clinton is doing a marvelous job of highlighting the issue of women's equality around the world. one thing that we need to do in this country is the united states senate needs to ratify the united nations women's convention, the convention on the elimination of

discrimination. host: when was that passed by the u.n.? guest: in the late 1970's. it was signed by president jimmy carter in 1980. in order to become the law of the land, it would be ratified by the senate. whether controlled by democrats or republicans, has never seen fit to ratify this very simple equality treaty for women. and it's frankly an outrage. in fact, now's global issues committee, we have a number of ad hoc committees of members from around the country that work on specific issues. our global issues committee will be working to convene a number of rallies around the country in march that we're going to do to urge the senate to ratify it. host: any better hope this time around getting it passed? guest: yes. usually in the past 20 years or so, we've had better luck

getting -- when democrats are in control, but with democratic-controlled estimates in the past, we still haven't managed to get it ratified and we're hoping to get it done this time. host: next call, florida. on our independents line. caller: good morning. my question is, i've never heard it talked about in health care, we've got 15 million undocumented aliens in this country that could walk into an emergency room and get free health care. now, my solution is if you hire somebody to work for you in this country, you should provide that and their family if you bring them, with health care. that's all. host: any thoughts on his point? guest: well, i know that a lot of -- there has been a lot of talk about providing health care for undocumented immigrants. now has taken the position very strongly that we need comprehensive immigration reform, and that it's not a solution to in a punitive way

withhold health care particularly from children who don't really have a choice of being in this country in a family. some of the adults may be undocumented, some may be documented. it's a very complicated picture. but punitive measures to withhold health care or education are not the way to go. host: we talked about equal pay. a tweet. if a pay is required to be set according to education level required to perform that job, wouldn't congress be paid $50,000 a year? sort of a tongue-in-cheek comment. to omaha, nebraska. good morning, margaret. caller: first of all, i don't agree with your position that people don't get involved. my issues are these. president obama said that he would not have special interest

groups involved, and yet you pointed out that you are responsible in the health bill. number two, you're so much for universal health care that yet in england, where they do have it, the success of getting treated for breast cancer is much less -- what do i want to say? than the frequency of getting cured in breast cancer is less than here. the access to mammograms is less. each of the cancer medicines are available here that are not available there because of a rush. you talk about -- i'm 67 years old. and i know the rations and i know people that live there that goes on. to get your own medical doctor is like nil. it takes you a year to get your

own family doctor. host: marg, are you -- margaret, are you happy with your health care coverage now? caller: yes, i always have been. i know there are people that don't have access. but when you pull out the figure of 47 million, that's not true. i have a 20-something that doesn't have insurance, but that's because he simply doesn't want to buy it at this time. caller: well, first of all, the english health care system is in fact a very good health care system, and i understand that on some conservative talk shows and radio talk shows and cable and so forth that there's been a real effort to paint both the canadian and the british system is somehow dysfunctional. in fact,, the outcomes in england and canada are superior to the health outcomes in this country. host: she talked about mammograms. are they better in the u.k. and

canada? guest: that's a guest: i do not know. you have to be careful looking at those statistics. there's a lot of information that is not necessarily factual. currently in united states wheat to ration health care. we ration it in an inept -- on rational way, making it unavailable to people who do not have jobs. it disproportionately affects women and people of color. that is not acceptable. host: terry o'neil, president of the national organization of women. thank you for being with us this morning. >> c-span coverage of the national health care debate continues tonight with wisconsin democrat ron kind. he recently held a town hall meeting and we will show it to you here at 8:00 p.m. hear on c-

span. on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," of reporter on cia interrogations' and the attorney general's decision is to review them. also, someone from the american association of school administrators to review their steady on stimulus money given to school. and author barry ritholtz on his book, "bailout nation." washington journal tomorrow morning. >> alan merten from george mason university, tonight on the communicators. >> how is c-span funded? >> private donations. >> the taxpayer. >> grants and stuff like that. >> donations. >> contributions from donors.

>> how is c-span funded? america's cable companies created c-span as a public service, a private business initiative -- no government mandate, no government money. >> now singer, songwriter, an actor need just talk about living with diabetes. -- nick jonas talking about living with diabetes. from the national press club, this is about 30 minutes. >> good afternoon. welcome to the national press club. i am president of the national press club and a reporter for " usa today." we are the world's leading professional organization for journalists and are committed to what future of journalism by providing informative programming and journalism education and fostering a free press worldwide.

for more information about the press club, please visit our web site. on behalf of our 3500 members worldwide, a like to welcome our speaker and our guests in the audience today. i would also like to welcome those of you who are watching on c-span. we're looking for to the speech and we will ask as many questions from the audience as time permits. please hold your applause said that we have as much time for questions as possible. if you hear applause, it may be from guest and members of the general public and not necessarily from the working press. i would like to introduce our head table guest and ask him to stand briefly when your head names are called. from the right, kelly bright, anchor and correspondent, fox news channel. the production coordinator for abc news. washington bureau chief for the

"houston chronicle," and a past president of the national press club. the senior editor of a magazine and chairman of the national press club possible word of directors. the national editor for "of vanity fair." the regional head of the diabetes organization and a guest of our speaker. the speaker's committee chair and a reporter for bloomberg news. melissa, an independent journalist. she also organized this lunch, so thank you very much. kevin jonas, manager for the joe jojonas brothers and finally,

the near a science researcher with the national institute of health. a lecturer and author. [applause] imagine flocks of frenzied fans, swarms of screaming girls, and piercing squeals at a sold-out concert. that is another day at the office for our guest today. he is a young man who was catapulted to the world stage. in case you have not heard, they are the wildly popular brand renominated teen band that has raised not one but two covers of "rolling stone." they had been called the clean teen machine and the princes of pop. they have sold 8 million copies

worldwide. begun this member joins us today, breaking away from a summer world concert tour for their new album, which debuted at number one on the billboard charts. he is chief songwriter, singing sensation, and teen heartthrob nick jonas. [applause] at age 16, nick is the second youngest best effort to speak on this podium which had been a forum for presidents and kings, ceo's and politicians. almost anyone can sell millions of records, become a film and television star, and a teen idol, right? so we invited nick to discuss one of his other roles, advocate for many millions who have had a life-threatening disease juvenile diabetes. he grew up in a musical family in new jersey. his mother home schooled good

boys. his father is a position and co- founder of christ for the nation. he started his show-biz career at age 6, starring in broadway musicals and snacking us know -- solo album deal before he and brothers kevin and joke form to the gym as brothers -- and joe formed at the jonas brothers. when the band was first taking off, nick was landed a life threatening below. he was diagnosed with type i diabetes, a medical condition that has no cure. he had a learned to manage his diabetes on the road as they saw astonishing success. last year "forbes" name them break out stars of the year, listed in the top 10 richest

pot? with a like a madonna, -- top 10 richest pop acts with the likes of madonna. they also have the run television series. instead of staying silent about his diabetes, as many public figures have done, nick is using his global platform to become a role model for children with diabetes, proving that the disease does not have to slow anyone down. as celebrity ambassador, he is leading a national campaign to inspire kids facing the daily challenges of counting cards, testing their blood sugar, and injecting themselves with insulin so they can live a normal life. he has written along, "just a little bit longer," about his diabetes.

his foundation has given a million dollars in grants worldwide. he testified this summer before the senate committee for more diabetes research funding. he also met with president obama at the white house. all of this and not yet old enough to vote. please help me welcome singer, songwriter, an actor and advocate, mr. nick jonas, to the national press club. [applause] >> thank you, donna, and members of the national press club. it is an honor to be before you today. i am grateful for the opportunity. i was diagnosed with type i diabetes in november 2005. my brothers were the first to notice that i've lost a

significant amount of late, 15 pounds in three weeks. i was thirsty all the time. my attitude had changed. i am a really positive person and that changed during these few weeks. it would have been easy to blame my symptoms on the schedule. my family knew i had to get to a doctor. the normal range of blood sugar is between 70 to 120. my blood sugar was over 700. the doctor said that type i i diabetes and i had no idea what that meant. the first thing i asked was, am i going to die? she looked right at me and said no. this is something that you will have to live with for the rest of your life. we would like to a hospital where i would spend the next three days. my stay included a crash course on getting my blood glucose levels under control and living with diabetes.

i thought to myself, what good could come out of this? where can enjoy it be? alcan i turn this into something that could encourage and inspire other people? it was not there. while driving, it started to rain. lightning strikes and thunder roars. we think, where is the good? and it just was not there. like something out of the movie, you watched the character and you feel bad for them but you never think it will be you. that was me that night. and so was i looked at my dad as he was driving the car, eclectic. -- it clicked. something good could come out of this. we were on a journey that would

take us to places that i cannot even begin to imagine. this last february, we performed with stevie wonder. moments where you have to pinch yourself to even begin to feel the reality there. i knew that that was coming. somehow, someday, so i said, enough is enough. and a feeling sorry for yourself. i made a commitment to myself that night that i would not let it slow me down. it has been an incredible journey, a lot update -- a lot of ups and downs. at my young age, a lot of you are saying that he is still a child. i can assure you ithat i was not going to let diabetes let me down. to this day, it has not. at times when the blood sugar is high and low, it would be easy

to throw in a towel and say enough is enough. i like to have a day off from diabetes. it just does not work like that. and so when i meet these kids that come up and hear me tell that my story, i laugh and to say, it is hard to believe. when i talk about it and share my story, i am just saying what happened. to think that it can encourage and inspire someone in the world is an amazing thing. and it is crazy to think that a song that i rode "just a little bit longer," it can help someone somewhere. we were shooting a movie called "camp rock." it was a day when might sugar was out of range and it was a tough day.

but i sat down and the song came easily. it was therapy for me in a moment. last night i met at least 10 kids with diabetes that said that song touch them. again, it is hard to believe. i have always had a heart for helping others and i realize that i have been given a platform to speak out to encourage and inspire the people with diabetes. reaching out and sharing my story is one of the ways that i can give the back to others. my brothers also started the change for the children foundation. last year alone, we raised $1 million for charities that are close to our hearts. these funds with organizations like pediatric diabetes research, education, and treatments, as well as diabetes camps. i have been the ambassador for young people with diabetes, part of the partnership i have with

diabetes organization. we want to inspire kids with the simple wins, every day victories for managing your diabetes. we started of website. each day i accomplish some of my simple iwns that i would not be able to do without the support of my family and friends to help manage my diabetes every day. every day i need to monitor my blood sugar, which requires me to testify about 10 to 12 times a day. i use that meters so that other people can carry on the test trips to make sure that i always have my tools to be ready to test. since my diagnosis, high of one my dog attacked let people know that i have diabetes. and we thought it would be great to create our own dog attack that anyone can wear as a symbol of support for all people with diabetes. we launched this dogtag program.

another project that i launched earlier this year allows young people to created lakes best -- its -- to creatively express their own simple wins. you can record a video that shows your simple wins. it can be a video, drawing, painting, or any other active created it -- or any other act of creativity. you may have seen some of those submissions when you came in today. in september, i get to select a grand prize winner who like get to personally meet. our partnership has made an impact not only on my life but on some many young people with diabetes, not only for the programs we have launched but with the ongoing support for the change for the children foundation. i am so grateful for all that they have done to help my brothers and i reach our

individual goals. i want to thank all of you for coming here today. i see many familiar faces in the audience. i think of you each day. all of us together will be able to help people with diabetes still supported and loved. a lot like to invite -- i would like to invite nancy from bayer to come up and speak about our partnership. [applause] >> very nice. i want to do this. it looks so cool. [hammer pounding] [laughter] thank you, nick, for sharing your story. i can think of a better menu than the historic national press

club, and no one better to share it with and members of the press, people would gather to disseminate news. we're delighted you could join us here today. a couple of years ago, we at bayer to notice that need jonick jonas have publicly admitted his diabetes. we were struck with that family, and how they all embraced his diabetes to support him. we reached out to net about partnering with bayer for the common cold toward simplifying life with people with diabetes. we were delighted when he said yes. we announced it the partnership. today we continue to be amazed by the number of kids and adults who -- whose lives are impacted by diabetes impactednick had been able to meet with his message of hope and inspiration.

it is clear that when he talks about diabetes, people listen. until there is a cure, the greatest weapon against diabetes is increased awareness and knowing how to manage it. the words that -- the work that we're doing together enable young people to connect with nick's experience. they say that he inspires them to achieve their simple iwns, small everyday paper is for managing diabetes that can lead to big differences over times. we could not be more proud of how we of touch so many lives in some many ways, from raising diabetes awareness, to raising funding for treatment and research, not to mention health. i. key part of the partnership that has proven to be successful, all believe you received one of the dogtags -- hopefully you received one of the gdogtags when you came

in. i am wearing mine proudly. this was introduced last november. it has raised $75,000 for change for the children, and thousands of people are showing their support for people with diabetes by wearing them. to launch our partnership, nick made an initial nation of $100,000 to the change for the children foundation for you and your brothers. in celebration of our ongoing commitment, i am pleased to present you with another $100,000 check. [applause] this is for them joe jona jona'' change for the children foundation.

[applause] >> are you done with your speech? we are going to go to the many questions you all have for neck. the first one comes from someone age 16 he was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes at age 12. as an international celebrity, you serve as an inspiration to those of us living with juvenile diabetes. how did you make that decision to share this very personal struggle with the public? what were some of the things that you had to think about before you went public? >> the main thing was making sure that i had it under control myself before i talk about it publicly. for the first six months, i continue to learn on my own and my family how to manage my diabetes to make sure that i could feel comfortable to speak in front of people and share my story.

>> you probably have to call to the doctor lot. a lot of kids are scared about going to the doctor. at get your strength up and ready to go? -- how did you get your strength up and ready to go? >> i have a really great doctor. she has been a great supporter of me and everything i am doing to raise awareness about diabetes. when it comes to going to the doctor, you just have to do it. sometimes i try to pick which figure i would -- which thing or i would have to pick. but being selecteive when away when i had to do it tend to 12 times a day. but she is a great doctor. >> are you the only one in family you has diabetes? your parents or grandparents have as well? colors my grandfather has type ii diabetes.

i am the only one in the family right now. i hope that they do not get it but we will see. yet they do, i will be right back their side to help them out. >> is it hard for you to talk about your diabetes? sometimes you feel like you want more privacy? >> there are times when i do keep things to myself when it comes to my diabetes. but for the most part, i try to be as open as possible about it. i know what it's like to feel alone and suffer with diabetes. when i first found out, i did not know anybody who had had diabetes. it is on the tv screen right there in person with someone, that means the world and i'm happy to do it. >> stress is known to worsen diabetes symptoms. had you ever noticed this?

how you cope with your stressful schedule? >> there times when the schedule does get hectic but you have to take it in stride and one step a time. it does with managing your diabetes as well, making sure you have the right tools and taking care of it, and everyone around you watching out for it and making sure they are with you every step of the way. >> can you tell me some of the ways that your family supports you and supports your managing your diabetes? >> diabetes is not something that affects the individual, but the entire family, everyone around them. i think it is important that everyone is educated, not only in our family by our staff and crew are around is, they all know to take care of a problem if there is one. it is important have good people around you who helped you get through it. >> you mentioned that you were scared when you first found out that you had diabetes. what were some of the other

motions that you went through, and how you feel now when you have to procure a vendor so many times a day? -- when you need to prick your finger so many times a day? >> my first big shock was having to drink diet coke. i'm a big soda drinkers. i cannot get enough of it now but it was rough at first. >> what is your favorite food? >> i have to be very careful when saying this. as much as i would love to have a slice of that kate, i will hold off with the cameras watching. but when it comes to food, i am a big stake eater. i would just like pat -- i guess i am a man in that light have a stake. but fruit, too. a big free fan.

-- a big fruit and. >> my son wears the same pod. >> i use the omnipod. i wear when i am on stage but i do not use the meter with me on stage. we were tight pants at times, so -- [laughter] i did not know i was being funny. i handed off to other people to take care of when i'm on stage. >> heidi and now what you have too much or too little sugar? do you feel different? >> i definitely don't different yet my blood sugar is high or low. checking frequently is important. i had been good on stage and not had to many lows. my mom is on me about it. you have to be with the people

revenue to make sure you manage it well. >> what you keep for emergency snacks? -- what do you keep for emergency snacks? >> make sure there is always on jews or apple juice on the side, it just in case there is a low or wherever we are. -- there is orange juice or apple juice on the side, just in case there is a low or wherever we are. >> what is a typical day for you? >> a typical day for us -- this store in particular has been a lighter schedule. we have been able to hub out of different cities and states in one place for a number of nights, which is nice. we get up around 7:00 a.m., to the press or play golf. then again on a plane and had to the city we're playing that night. we have a sound check party, so we bring in guests to watch a

sound check. we answer questions, meeting greek, some interviews, do the show that night and then do it all over again. >> because you have to prick your finger so often, how does it affect the way to play your instrument? >> going back to what i said to be selective. the first time i checked it, november 16, 2005, she asked which figure and i was being selective, because i'm a guitar player. but after a minute a figure out which figure, she said, just give me your finger. we will probably have to do this a couple more times. trying to switch it up a lot, but occasionally you will have a spot. but it is all good.

>> and much of your time you spent checking on your blood in your server? your blood sugar? >> they're like five exclamation points after that. how many times a day? tanner 12 times a day. i have been good about it lately. -- ten or 12 times a day. >> what the downside said, and had you missed out on anything you wanted to do because of diabetes? >> there have been some things that i had to be cautious about, sports, making sure that i do not go too hard before a show. the pingpong matches can be pretty heated. but keeping it in control in knowing where i met before i go on stage. >> is at heart a manager diana

and watch what do you read when you are traveling? >> in the beginning it was difficult. luckily now we travel with our own catering, said they gave me that carbohydrate fax that i eat and make sure i know what is in the food so that i can properly manage it. but going back to what i said before, making sure everyone is aware. i am an independent person but when it comes to diabetes, i have to let other people in and let them help me manage it. or it could get out of hand. have some good people on top of me about taking care of it. >> what is the best part about being a rock star? [laughter] >> wow. being able to play every night in front of so many people. there were the days when there were 15 people it shows.

those at the moment when we would say, living the dream, kind of sarcastically. [laughter] and then when the crowds got a lead -- bigger, last night we played in front of 20,000, it was definitely living the dream and a good sense with the smiles on our faces. we definitely love it. >> what is the toughest thing about being a rock star? dollars there are some early mornings and late nights sometimes. back and be difficult. i like to sleep. -- >> there are some early mornings and late nights sometimes. that can be difficult. i like to sleep. >> when you were younger and figured out you had diabetes, how did you put up with a sugary temptation that your friends with snack on? everything comes with hearts on it. [laughter]

>> i think it was difficult at first to see things and maybe one at that moment. but the thing about diabetes is that you can pretty much it would you like. you just have to take insulin for it and take it in smaller portions. learning all of that at first, now i can point to something and tell you. but it was difficult at first to what progress restore and seed can be all -- but it was difficult at first to walk through a store and see the candy aisle. >> have you ever had to miss the show were canceled because of diabetes? >> my brothers and i were talking about that the other day. we have never had to cancel a show. we've had to reschedule because of the weather but diabetes has

never caused us to cancel a show, thankfully. >> anna, aged 9, asks how she can support her cousin who has diabetes? >> one of the main ways that people can support their friends and family who have diabetes is to be there for them. when i talk about the song, no one can with wrote -- no one can relate with what you're going to as an individual. they do not know what is going on insider minding your heart. but they can say, i cannot relate with you directly but i am here for you if you need me. that is the best thing for me. >> speaking of the song, the line -- you do not know what you've got until it's gone -- what did you trying to express here? >> probably the chocolate cake, actually.

[laughter] [applause] i'm just saying. no, there is a deeper meaning to that. i hope so. wow. the day when i rode it, i was at the piano and it was a tough day. my blood sugar was high and low. i was just wishing that it would be normal and like everybody else. the cast is great from the movie and we have a lot of fun. but i was watching all of them and they were being rude in front of me, but eating freely in doing what they wanted. i had to think about everything that i eat. and just wishing that i could be normal and not had it for a day. i think the sun goes on to talk about that you do not know what you've got until it's gone, you don't know what it's like to feel so low. but in a little bit longer, i'll be fine. that is the moral of the story.

>> what got you into singing and writing songs? >> i have always had a heart for music from the time i was three or four years old. i wrote my first song when i was 6, and my dad as a minister -- musician. i grew up in the house of music. i just fell in love with it. i did some broadway shows, four broadway shows from the time i was 7 to 11. i wanted to see if that is where my heart was. i rode a solid my brothers and we became a group. that was five years ago. it just happened from there. it has been a long, journey. we are having a good time. >> how does beyond on broadway compared to giving a concert -- how does being on broadway compared to giving a concert? >> it is much different. it was good training for what i am doing and i am so thankful that i did it. but very different.

a broadway show is every night in the same thing. with the torque coming you never know what it is going to be. -- with the tour, you never know what it is going to be. you have to be ready for everything. >> what is your favorite song from your cd? >> that was our most recent album the came out in june. there's a song on their which is a song i wrote on the piano. "black keys." he was the first song i had written on the black keys. and then i saw the concept shifted from that to looking at life in seeing that sometimes looking at things like black- and-white is better than the perfect picture. it stood out to me as a song that meant something to me personally. i sing and every night, and the

crowd sings along and it is some amazing thing. >> did your parents make you practice the piano? did it sometimes makes you mad? [laughter] >> i don't think there was ever too much practiced -- pressure on us to practice the piano, in particular. i picked up the guitar first and the drums and fell in love with that. my dad as a pianist so i thought of him and he taught me a couple of things. but taking the time to learn it on my own, and watching other musicians, that is a lesson in and of itself. my dad and other people that i met along the way. they really treat me as a musician. >> who is your musical idol and why? >> i am a big fan of the was costello, johnny cash, france, and stevie wonder, of course.

-- elvis costello, johnny cash, prince, and stevie wonder, of course. johnny cash, i've always been intrigued by his storytelling. such great music, obviously, but the storytelling stood out to me. i said i water rights stores like this so i can tell a story in song. elvis costello is a very intellectual character. it is always fun to see that. dollars were you listening to your ipod this morning? what were you listening to? >> this morning i was watching sports center, actually. but the last time i was on my ipod, i was listening to of new band. >> what is a favorite song that you have written? >> would probably be "a little bit longer." it means a lot to me.

probably my favorite song to play live as well. >> will there be an ope"camp rok 2"? >> there actually will be. we wrap up the tour and start filming. we get a 12-hour break. it should be good. >> can you give us a preview of that movie? what is going happen? -- what is going to happen? >> i have read the script and it is good. i am looking forward to it doing it. one of our friends just had a number one album. we're very proud of her. it should be a lot of fun. we would get up there and shooting the second installment. >> if you think you will get your own action figure doll? -- do you think you will get your own action figure dock?

>> i had been asked this question before we started. i hope so. joe had one. he had an action figure, more like a barbie. [laughter] that is why i'm concerned. as long as i look like a g.i. joe, i am fine. [laughter] >> it sounds like you have a hard schedule. what is your favorite part of storing and what is the hardest part? >> the best part is being to play every night. i remember the days when there were not as many people at the shows as there are now. being able to play is amazing. and the top part? i think it is all good. we have a great team and a lot of fun when we are on the road. we're coming toward the end of the u.s. installment, so it is kind of sad. but it is fun. we are having a great time. we're heading to europe after we should "camp -- after we shoot

"camp rock" in canada? >> how long does it take to write a song? >> it usually comes very quickly. but sometimes it takes a week. for the most part, an hour to write a song. it is fun. one of my passions, so it comes easily. >> to you have time to have a social life? what do you do when you have time have fun? >> when i have time for fun, i am big in the sports. golf -- we have a softball team and we are on the road. we play a loss of all was well. but we definitely have a time to go and watch movies and hang out. we are each other's best friend, kevin and joe and i. we enjoy each other's company. >> do you have a girlfriend? [laughter]

>> i am trying to figure out how to ask this question? >> somebody to put a lot of hearts on the paper. >> i do not, actually. [laughter] it's crazy. dollars ok, moving on. what is your favorite book? >> amazing. my favorite book. there is this book that i have, the 1000 " best -- at thousand best clothes of all time. does not really a story but it has a lot of amazing quotes. i will save them an interview, and someone will say, did you come up with that? and i cannot take credit. but it is a great book. i like a lot. >> why did you give away a guitar friday in charlotte? >> i like to give away guitar's

if i see someone in the audience to i think would like it. usually they are playing a guitar. so i give them the real thing. -- usually they are playing air guitar. so i give them the real thing. it was a girl the ticket and i was glad to see she like it. >> mary tyler moore's spoke recently about juvenile diabetes, an event that you attended. what was like testifying to congress a budget diabetes? >> that was an amazing thing to be a part of. such an honor, and was thankful to be a part of it. i was nervous when i spoke, but it was great to see that it went over well. i have seen a lot of kids that were there in the city's that we have gone too. it was great to see them again, to say that they are doing things in their c