so there's no consistency it is a very frustrating situation for nurses. host: are you satisfied with your salary? caller: know. they are starting nurses at $53,000 at. i am making that at 34 years of nursing. guest: you bring of many key points in relation to your experience as a nurse. i started out from a three-year diploma and i went on to get my degree and my masters. we have about the same amount of tenure in the field. you are seeing that you have seen a lot of change. . to make the most difference. and i'm always one that supports

nursing, finding that opportunity. that doorway to the patient care, to the arena which they love and have a palings for. you ask a question to how nurses can impact health care reform. my response to that, patricia, is that we're over three million is that we're over three million strong in this country. vast majority of caregivers at the bedside and caregivers in the health care industry. so we need to be well versussed on what the issues are related to health care reform. we have a lot of professional organizations. i'm sure that you've participated in and your colleagues have participated in. and you're probably following, as i am, and as we are here, what those reforms are looking like, what kind of impact it's going to have on nursing. as i was preparing this week and thinking about what message for virginia hospital center nurgses might be most appropriate for me to convey with an opportunity like today, and nurses throughout the organization here at virginia hospital sent rer concerned as you are.

what is it going to look like in the future? how is it going to impact the number of nurses we're able to provide the resource that we have to deliver the high-quality care at the end of the day that we're satisfied with? this is on everybody's minds. and to that i would encourage us, as some of the nurses have said here in this hospital, as an industry to take stock of where we are to appreciate the gains technically that you have seen and i have seen so that we do have people surviving through the cardiac caj rizzations and outcomes. take a pause. look at what our achievements have been and don't lose that ground. build on top of that ground that we've work sod hard for, doctor -- worked so hard for. people attached to the health care for these many years have driven our outcomes to places that other countries in relationship to what we're able to achieve with our interventions and our treatments that are still out of reach for them but comes at a cost.

and it is a large dilemma. but stay tuned to what's going on. be a part of the voice in relationship to making decisions. the other message i heard from the nursing staff here at virginia hospital center is to urge our legislative people to not rush to an end too soon, to be thoughtful to take their time, to think about what needs to happen next with the sense of urgency. but not to rush people to a place where they're fearful of what's coming next down the line with health care reform. that some of what we're seeing in the public might be because it's so personalized in relationship to the outcome of where this health care reform is going to land. but, again, nursing is going to be a big component. we've been a big component of health care in the past. we will be in the future. and actually, it's an exciting time. if you are energized around providing patient care to have your voice heard and be part of where we're going as a nation. host: nurses are first-team

medical care. do they know whether a patient is medicare, blue cross-blue shield, united, uninsured? guest: no. i would say we have an awareness of it in relationship that we're part of the team that's also helping manage what is in the best patient care interests related to the length of stay. there are teams in the hospital responsible for that and working with the physicians and the nursing staff together to coordinate that activity. when we're in front of patients, we don't have that awareness. nurses in general, and i believe physicians as well, that's not what we're here for. we're here for meeting the patient, where they are, what their needs are. the ability to pay or not pay is not something that is ever in the forefront of our minds. host: how did you decide to become a nurse? guest: i had the advantage of growing up around mentors who were very influential. my mother, my father were people of father, of compassion, and of great service. my father is a world war ii veteran who came back, had a job. but also served in our community

of the town council, as fire chief, as a county official. i had the advantage of seeing my mother and my father extend their hand to people throughout my growing years. i also volunteered in the hospital. as many of you heard, physician colleagues of mine. i volunteered. i saw this as an opportunity. i enjoyed the sciences and just wanted to be with people and it grew from there. i had a mentor, an aunt as well. there's many nurses in my family as well as physicians. host: jack, savannah, georgia, insured line. guest: my daughter is a registered nurse in the state of michigan. she works in delivery, neo-natallal and i.c.u. for babies. she's been there 18 years. i support single payer, universal health coverage for all. i'm a big-time supporter of that. but i also support tort reform.

and not only limit the amount of damages for some of these that people have, bunt i think that a panel should sit down and work out loss of foot, loss of hand, loss of whatever and say this is the maximum that the courts can allow to be paid out. i also believe that the lawyers should get their hands out of the pot. that should be included in it. we have all of these allies around the world who have already went through this whole thing, canada included back in the 1950's. we don't have to pick a particular one. we can pick and choose the best of all of these plans and come up with a uniquely american plan. host: thank you, jack. two issues. single payer and tort reform. guest: first of all, jack, you

mentioned that your daughter is a nurse in nicu, neo-natallal intensive care. i believe that nursing has a feel for excess throughout the nation because so many people do know nurses. therthis is a really good examp. i'm sure a lot of jack's opinion is based on what he hears his daughter come home and say. in the nicu we've seen great advances in the last 10, 20 years. we're seeing baby that are -- even 15 years ago were unthinkable of being able to survive at the age and gestation that they have, how early they're born and the weight that they are. but also an arena where legal issues are a concern. it's a fine balance between what parents expect or patients might expect coming in the door for care, what we're able to actually do. every person who arrives in the hospital setting or is working with the physician is expecting usually the very best of outcomes. those expectationses when

they're not met, whether they're realistic or not, can turn into legal issues. tort reform is something that i'm not an expert in, but certainly health care industry and physician practices have been greatly impacted in how they make decisions, how we operate in this very litigious society. tort reform has taken hold in different states across the nation. i believe there is still a lot more work to be done there. host: darlene vrotsos, do nurses carry medical malpractice insurance like doctors do? guest: nurses should. i do. i certainly do. in hospitals there is an insurance coverage for all practitioners, all clinicians within the hospital. but beyond that, in this society, i encourage every nurse to carry their own individual insurance. host: how significant is the overall comprehensive malpractice insurance that the hospital pays for? guest: that would be an answer that would best come from robin normand. i know it's very significant.

it's something that needs to be budgeted into the hospital. certainly any increase in that arena limits what we do and are able to do with other resources in the hospital. everyone in the hospital, our health care business and nurses, we'd much rather see the doctors be spent on patient outcomes and patient care. host: but you also carry the malpractice insurance. guest: absolutely. host: is that an expensive proposition? guest: not as expensive because we are not sued as much. but i do carry over $2 million. host: nurse in columbia, connecticut. her name is judy. you're on with darlene, vice president and director of nursing. .

now i am in geriatrics. what i see is nurses that are coming in to being a nurse, the pressure of school is so great on them and the expense, even for lpn's. they are thinking of it as a job, not as taking care of people. for all those that are going to become nurses, i just wanted to say, you have to work with what is in your heart, because what is in your heart comes out your mouth. . those nurses are absolutely awesome. there are a lot of great new nurses out of there. they are taking care of people. thank you. host: what are you -- what are your duties?

caller: the only thing they rn can do it in a nursing home is start and i.v. i cannot run them and hang them and change them, but i cannot start o one. that basically is the only difference of a floor nurse. guest: well, i agree with what she is saying. one is the cost of education. it has increased. another point i would like to focus on that judy brought forward is the fact that we need to meet with our hearts. nursing is a noble profession. most people are choosing it because they want to make a difference. it requires a demanding intellect, strength of character, up flexibility, and

compassion. they lead it with their head and their heart. you need to care about. patients know that difference. people who come to this profession without that realization usually do not stay. we are not here for the money. we are here to make a difference nine times out of 10. she saw some graduates that do not have their head and the heart of wind with patient outcomes. -- they did not have their head and heart aligned. they have a lot to learn tactically. it is up to us as mentors to bring us to a level of nursing that integrates the higher level of caring for the populations. that is why i believe patients

connect with nurses. they do so on a level. we breached some of the gaps of knowledge and with their physicians if it exists. it is a demanding a place. host: my mother is an old nurse. she went to the three-year diploma hospital school in 1903. you went to the diploma school. they are going away. d.c. something missing with the level of technical expertise with hospital in training schools? guest: as we move to a degree programs, there is not as much time. they do not have as many hours as the old schools of nursing did. that gap is being addressed as we're bringing in new graduates.

our average age today -- this is excluding the leadership team -- is 30 years. that has dramatically changed. we have a lot of graduate nurses. we have made accommodations. mentor programs. they are in the form -- nurses are not on their own for a good number of months, depending on the field they are specializing in. we know it is a challenge and an issue. also, it is a utilization of resources. what it costs to bring a nurse up and running is significant. it is important that those resource chefs are thought about carefully in relationship -- those resource shifts are

thought about carefully. whether it is providing time@@@b host: what is the philippine pipeline when it comes to nursing? guest: the philippine pipeline is in reference to the idea of bringing nurses in from other countries, and the philippines have been one of the focuses in the past 10 or 15 years, to fill in gaps of nursing shortage. i am sure many of our listeners have heard about it. we are in a little bit of a reprieve right now with the economy downturn. there are still nursing shortages everywhere. t plans. therefore ones have changed dramatically. we are having people stay in the field longer.

if we look of some of the projections, as far as 2020, when maybe half a million nurses short. as baby boomers leave, and they are becoming those that use the health care system the most. you have this duality of baby boomer impact to what is going to happen in health care. addressing the nursing shortage with nurses coming in from the philippines is not the answer. it is not the answer in taking nurses away from the philippines because it is a global issue. we want to provide the best care we can. there are plenty of qualified people who should look to a nursing as a qualified profession. i seek good support from government-supported programs for governments -- for

scholarships and grants. host: darlene vrotsos, before we take this last call from karen, we want to make sure we thank the virginia hospital center for allowing us to become part of their system and to conduct interviews. everything we have done here is available on our website, at c- span.org. go to c-span.org. it is all available there of the website, including some of the short interviews with doctors we have done. you'll be able to sit everything there. karen, maersk, please go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you. thank you for your focus on health care providers.

i am retired. i put not be if it had not been for an injury. i am an old nurse like your mother. emphasis on "olds. " i graduated with a bachelor of science from the university of missouri. does that qualified me as old, i think. my last of time in nursing, over 40 years, has a perspective of all the changes that have taken place, it for good or ill. i would agree with the director, who was not called a director anymore either. that is fine with me. i want to address you respectfully. i want to emphasize the business of the parts. i have never known anyone who comes into nursing and stays in

nursing that does not have a hard to. i know many times -- that does not have a heart. many times i've wanted to leave. this is who i am. there are some things i agree with and disagree with. nursing education. at the time i was going to school, we had a lengthy program. there was an earlier bsn programs and there were including clinical experience. it was a solid five years. we went to school year round. the argument about the basic entry level was all print them. we had long -- we're long past that time. host: i apologize. we have run out of time.

in your 40 years as a nurse, how has your relationship with doctors changed? caller: i love working with doctors. it was part of the work. i respect them greatly. host: we have run out of time. thank you for calling in. guest: in relationship to producing nurses, we have a significant shortage of nursing faculty. in any given year, but we're turning away almost 50,000 qualified applicants because we lacked the faculty. if you have great experience, i encourage people to become a faculty member and help us address this gap that is facing nursing. host: darlene vrotsos the chief

nursing officer and vice president for virginia hospital center. thank you for being with us. we also >> live shortly on c-span, and look at the implications of japan's national election. over the weekend, the opposition democratic party won control of japan's parliament after 54 years of controlled by the liberal democratic party. adji for host a discussion at johns hopkins university -- bob schieffer hosts a discussion at johns hopkins university. c-span continues its look at health care tonight at 8:00 eastern. "washington journal" visited a hospital in virginia. tonight, a look at emergency

health care. it begins at 8:00 eastern. then, a health-care town hall with house democrat leader steny loyd your who talked to constituents last night. -- steny we are. tomorrow, vice-president biden talks about the product -- progress of the economic stimulus and the overall state of the economy. c-span and c-span radio will have live coverage starting at about 10:00 eastern. the economic stimulus was a topic this morning on "washington journal." we will show as much as we can until live coverage in about 10 minutes. host: government efforts to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars into the u.s. economy appeared to be helping u.s., of the worst recession in decades.

@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ host: about 84 of the $409 billion in spending has been paid. almost $200 billion has been promised a certain projects such as infrastructure and energy. following up on the front page of "the wall street journal," the headline "global economy gains steam."

caller: a lot of people i know are feeling the hit of this recession. i feel like the steps the president made are good ones.

caller: i think that the stimulus package may be helping a very little bit, but i cannot tell much about it. i just wanted to ask the question early on, and it really does not pertain to that, but since senator kennedy's death and all the accolades, and he was a good man and everything like that, but we have another democratic senator they do not hear too much about him, senator robert byrd, the longest ever serving senator. i would think that -- the reason i mention him, me being a republican, i am concerned about the czars in this government,

and if you want to put senator byrd of as being a wise man, he wrote the president a letter on february 25 and talk about the dangers of the usurpation of the powers from the congress. between that and what i have been seen in the media about some of them, i am very concerned, and i would appreciate it if senator robert byrd -- i do respect the man for his audacity to question the president. i think that is something more people should be concerned about. host: springfield, ohio. caller: i took a drive to florida and took interstate 85 and i saw construction in ohio, tennessee, kentucky, georgia,

and florida. so i think the stimulus plan has put people back to work. i saw it for myself. host: baltimore, maryland. caller: i do not think this administration is getting its due process. my wife and i and my family took advantage of to stimulus packages. no. 1 was the homeowners affordable refinance. we refinanced from 7% to four 0.5% and paid $20 less than what we were paying monthly -- we refinanced to 4.5%. with the "cash-for-clunkers", we got a nice chevy. my oldest daughter is in college, and if you volunteer you get a four thousand dollars cash credit. this is helping out, and we have

been doing other things. we lowered our thermostat -- i mean we raised it up for the summertime so it does not run as much. we have done every thing we can, and i am seeing road work being done here in baltimore and throughout maryland. we elected this president for four years. this report card, what he did from the time he got elected to where he is now, we elected him for four years. i am hoping it is going to work. i am seeing great signs. my 401k took a hit when the economy went down. i lost 10 grant and my wife lost eight. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i am an engineer by trade. i do work for one or city

governments. my wife works for the state of maryland. she is being laid off in nine days because they are taking some furloughs there. we are hopeful, and we are seeing some great times. we are in for the long haul. host: the caller referenced "cash-for-clunkers". in "usa today," there was an article. caller: i really think this is just propaganda to boost of

confidence so that people will go out and spend when they shouldn't. we have double-digit unemployment. we are handing out welfare programs with "cash-for- clunkers" for people who eventually may not be able to afford the payments. i foresee the u.s. to be in an inflationary period at the end of the year that will be the highest it has ever been. that is my opinion. host: barry on the democratic line. caller: i am calling in regard to its stimulus improving the economy. i would say it most definitely is. and you look at the fact there over 1.5 million people who are currently unemployed right now, the fact that they are still being paid for this stimulus, money is being pumped into the economy. people question whether or not

it may cause inflation, but it has taken care of people's families, to turn around and pay for their home, and also the fact that the stimulus is creating jobs, even though some of the jobs for the infrastructure are coming around slow, in my opinion, it is probably too low. it should have been geared to 40% more infrastructure. it was paid out too much for taxes and so forth, but nevertheless, the tax went out and other entities not tax decreases and so forth. it really helped the economy out. a lot of people who are really criticizing these federal programs are making a big mistake. host: daniel from michigan on the independent line.

caller: i agree with the last caller 100%. a lot of it should have went to infrastructure. there is an old saying that the people who know the least, no with the loudest. i think obama is doing a bang of job -- know it the loudest. >> we are leaving this record a program for live coverage on japan's recent election and the future of u.s. relations with that country. the democratic party of japan gained control of the parliament after more than bt years in power by the liberal democratic party. you are watching live coverage from the center for strategic and international studies. >> political developments in the last 20 or 30 years and asia. what does it mean? that is what we are going to export tonight. we have some speakers to help us

explore that. this is the third of our series with schieffer school of journalism. we are proud to have that opportunity, bob. like you, i've probably get a little tired of angry journalism in america. what i always admire about bob schieffer is he is tough as nails, but he is civil, fair, and honest. it is that kind of spirit that he brings to his journalism but also brings to us in this forum. we are grateful to have all that. i just would like to say a special word of thanks to our friends at utc. they have given us a chance to partner with them on this. you all know them, you wrote down on one of their elevators when you came here. -- you rode down here.

bob, we will turn it to you. i want to welcome back my very dear friend, kurt campbell. he is not over in the state department. he went over to create the senator -- center for new american security. >> welcome once again. as they like to say in baseball, this partnership between csis and tcu, we hope it is good for both teams, but -- because it is certainly good for our team. we really enjoyed the opportunity to be here and join with csis. i would like to acknowledge the japanese ambassador. ambassador, welcome, and we will be calling on you when we go to questions here. here on the stage with us today

-- i have all this written down. kurt campbell, who is the assistant secretary now since june of this year. he was previously ceo and co- founder of the center for new american security. he has had several positions here at csis. he was senior vice president, director of international security program, the henry a. kissinger chair and national security policy, and also an associate professor of public policy and international relations at the kennedy school at harvard. michael greene is senior adviser and holds the japan chair here at csis. he is also an associate professor at georgetown and served as special assistant to

the president for national security affairs, senior director for asian affairs from january 2004 to december 2005. he joined the nsc in april 2001. he was director of asian affairs and worked at the council on foreign relations at the institute for defense analysis. he speaks fluent japanese and spent over five years in japan, working as a staff member and as a journalist for japanese american newspapers and as a consultant for u.s. business. steve clemens, senior fellow and director of the american strategy program at the new america foundation. he also serves as publisher of a very popular blog. he has been executive vice president of the economic strategy institute, a senior policy advisor at the synergy -- where i first met him when senator benjamin was making his

first race for congress. for seven years he was executive director of the japan america society of southern california, also co-founded with chalmers johnson the japan policy institute. gentlemen, let's get to it. mr. secretary, let me just are with you. what does this mean? what does it happen, and what does it mean for u.s.-japanese relations? >> thank you to my colleagues on the podium here and to csis. these are wonderful forums, and we are really grateful to the opportunity to export something a significant as this historic japanese election. it is important to take a few minutes to appreciate something that the united states and japan

share, which is this tremendous commitment to marks. what we have seen is an enormously important -- commitment to democracy. it is an important election that took place peaceably, in which a new generation of leaders have come to power in japan. at a very basic level, we recognize that and celebrate it, and we appreciated. i would like to just say today, earlier today, president obama reached mr. a hatoyama's son. they had a very good conversation. he thanked him for some statements of late on the importance of u.s.-japan relations. he congratulated him on the victory until the japanese leadership of the new party that the united states stands ready to work with japan over the course of the next several

weeks and months to ensure that our relationship is important going forward. this is a very early time. we have to take great care during the initial steps. we are trying to send a very consistent message of our determination to work closely and to consult with japanese friends. we have a schedule for fairly deep engagement over the next several months to ensure the highest possible level of consultation. i am confident that in terms of the basics, the fundamental issues, that unites the united states and japan, that those will remain in place. will there be some challenges along the way? undoubtedly there will be. the truth is that we face challenges over decades. we have surmounted them, and worked closely together. i think we have a lot of confidence that we will be able to do that over the course of the next several months. the watch word from our perspective right now is

patients, commitment, and solidarity. we are excited about the election and the way forward. we take nothing for granted in terms of expectations associated with issues beyond our alliance, but we do think that the foundation is there for a very strong relationship going forward. >> michael greene, you and any other analysts -- many other analysts nailed it. it is still almost a shock that one party has held power since 1955, and then they lose in in a total turnover. they not only lose, but they lose big. 300 out of four hundred 85 seats or something like that. -- 485 seats. why did it happen? >> the exit polls said why.

it was not because of that dpj's policies. they were sick and parks -- part of the liberal democratic party style. the japanese economy is growing at 1.9% a year per decade, and there is a sense that it just cannot go on. things have to change. this was a massive victory for the opposition. the japanese elections lately have been massive. there is a lot of swing in the japanese voters. they are ready to throw the bums out and get the new crew of china indeed the give the new crew a try. it is not that they have complete confidence in what they will do, but they are ready to throw the dice. >> it was not so much a vote for the new party as it was a vote against the old party.

rex that is right. that is pretty fair. there some things the democratic party promise. they will cut taxes and fees and stimulate the economy. they will empower civil society more. there will be up the bureaucracy. in terms of the real fundamental challenges in japan, how to restore long-term economic growth, what to do with foreign policy, there's not a clear, affirmative vote for anything. it was just time to get rid of the old crew. i talked to friends in rural japan who voted for the ldp their whole life. they took the step and threw everybody out, but there were not sure what comes next. >> and something like this happens, america always becomes an issue, it seems like. it was not that you heard anti- american statements from the new party as they are coming to this election, but you heard them talk about we need more independence from america, we

need to separate. is this going to make a difference in the japan-american alliance? >> i was writing a piece today that yukio hatoyama is going to find his in a row -- his inner obama. priorities will be set. the great aerial shrunk was responding and saying -- ariel sharon said that things would look different from behind the desk. i think this is an exciting election, in part because to be blunt, many people feel that the ldp lost its ability to be flexible in a lot of key areas. in the past it was able to reinvent itself, but you also had the impression, rightly or wrongly, that many japanese felt that the u.s.-japan relationship

on a whole variety of fronts was just up too much in the past. i have been one to suggest as well that there was a kind of brewing nationalism that i would consider nastic, right-wing nationalism. i am happy that now we will see a negotiated nationalism. part of that will involve the relationship with the united states and where they take it. recently, yukio high drama published in "the huffington post" era piece that was complaining about the negative consequences on japan. i made a comment that a lot of americans feel what hatoyama was saying as well. i think that when the book oca a blueprint for a new nation" was written, the arthur did not dismantle the u.s. relations. he talked about becoming a

greater stakeholder in that relation shiship and changing te image of japan being a satellite of the american interest in having a greater role. this is for the japanese near to that has been growing. we should look at this as a healthy thing. i prevent a reinvented -- i predict a reinvented relationship. i think it is a good thing, as opposed to what some people see that this will cost less influence. >> i like what both steve and mike have said. i think that for the alliance to maintain its relevance and its influence over the course of the first part of the century, a degree of independence, of confidence, is absolutely essential on the part of japan.

this is just been reaffirmed. these are not in contrast with one another. they are essential. it is important that japan feel confident an independent. the united states supports that. we do not see any contradiction in terms of the close alliance and greater independence in terms of doing business. i think we will find that even in an independent mind set, we will find ourselves taking very similar positions. i also think that one of the things we have heard is a desire to have a closer and deeper relationship in asia with both south korea and china. that has sometimes been positive -- posited as something that the united states is against. nothing could be further from the tacase. we believe in that process that will come to appreciate and

understand the significance of the u.s.-japan alliance. i would also suggest, we see this in the united states. i wrote a book on transitions. transitions in democracies are difficult pre this will be difficult and will take a period of time. we will have to be patient. it will probably play out not over a couple of weeks but months. new means and mechanisms of making decisions will be put in place. if i had one caution, i would say, my own personal experience with some of the finest professionals i have worked within japan -- they are bureaucrats. i would hate to see them some help posited as the enemy and gone after. i think over time, many of our new friends that have just

arrived to power will come to appreciate how strong these men and women are, how much they served in japan's interests over the course of the last several decades. of course there can be changes, but overall, there has been a lot of very good work done. we hope to continue our professional relationship with these people. >> from the u.s. standpoint, what are the most critical parts of this alliance? what means most to us on this side? >> that you just briefly go back to what occurred and steve said. there is this rhetoric and his narrative that is come out of the democratic party about distance from the u.s.. it is important to understand where the japanese people are. i will not vote for a lot of numbers, but recent polls showed 74% saying yes if they were

close to the united states. across the board, public opinion in japan is -- in some ways has never been better. a lot of the rhetoric about distancing from the u.s. and moving to asia comes of the narrative that the democratic party in japan used to try to attack the ldp. we are seeing that rhetoric still. i think it will start dying out as these guys come into office and start looking at north korea. there are few issues where we actually disagree with japan. on a strategic level, from the middle of the second world war, they knew they had to have a strong relationship with japan. our foreign policy on a bipartisan basis has been based on that for 60 years. we especially need it now, with the rise in china.

to provide a stable environment where we can both relate to china in a position of confidence. for international organizations to work, we have to be an agreement with japan. we are very close in g-20 discussions. for or forward presence across the hemisphere, our bases in japan are absolutely critical. that dpj has made noises about changing our forces, blocking okinawa. i do not think they want to go there, because they recognize that important these bases are. that is a long list of critical interest. >> you see any of those changes coming in any marked way? >> not any major things, but i

think that will be down the road, not on the front end of the hatoyama administration. there things that will make kurt campbell and a bit crazy about renegotiating the rights of military it servicemen on basis. i think there'll be some of that. curd will be ingenious and getting the japanese to move beyond -- kurt will be ingenious when they think about regional security. i think you will see, and what i hope happens, japan has some of the best international bureaucrats in the system. one of the things i feel that has been working against them, jesse helms supported going back. in the high commission for refugees and peacekeeping, in iaea, and japan used to combine

a kind of commitment to security 3 notion of independence in the system in ways that took the pressure of the united states from being that player. i think there has been some muting of that. i think it helped us and the relationship. i think japan, despite interest in this room and c-span and all the others, is the taken for granted ally. during the second gulf war, japan decided to stop challenging the u.s. on key trade issues and become our pal and subordinate a lot of its tensions. if you do not have points of tension with another country, you are not taken seriously. the u.s.-japan relationship has a lot less visibility than it should. that is why i am decided -- excited about this moment of

democracy. i think we will see japan rise in the relevance and significance and consequence in the eyes of congress, which has been under aware of it. when you look at this combined portfolio, going along with what mike said, i think we will see renewed interest and hopefully we will see japan come back to some of these international institutions. it is useful work for us, and were turned back to prominence. >> are we on the same page with japan on correa? -- on korea? >> even before the not reach from president obama, there have already been conversations between i trauma's son and his korean counterpart. -- between hatoyama's son and his korean counterpart. one of the things we have seen

it over several years is a tendency in certain circumstances for a variety of reasons to suddenly see itself correa -- to seek japanese and south lorean relations take a nosedive. we want to fort -- focus more on the future than the past. i think we see very real prospect of that going forward. that is our basic issue. i think we are going to see very good work in this area going forward. on north korea, is still early. a very general level, the united states and japan share basic beliefs. we will not accept a nuclear north korea. we are committed to a diplomatic process whereby through the six party framework, we try in some

future time to sit down with north korea, if they accept the commitment they have taken in 2005. i think you will see that the united states and japan will work closely together on north korea. we are pretty much in agreement on areas where rican work together. one of the real challenges, i do not think we fully appreciate how difficult it is, help wholesale change this is likely to be in terms of the whole new group of people. this is not just a new group of people coming into the executive branch. this is a new group of people, many of whom have never been in power, who will not only be in the legislative branch but will also serve in some capacity is in the executive branch. there is a tremendous discipline and rigor associated with power. it can be brutal and very challenging. we see that playing out not only in the united states but in other places. this is a whole new generation

of people who are experiencing this together for the first time. i think one of the things we have to be careful about is not to have unrealistic expectations in the short term about clear, coherent policy statements. it may take time for them to be able to fully denunciate. i think we have to be patient, and also understand that there will be some strafe layers and some comments made that -- some stray flares. we have to be much more focused on the ballast in the boat, which are the larger issues which unite the united states and japan. >> i just wanted to add one point to a firm something that kurt said. this party with 300 plus members will have to hire staff people, train staff people, educate them about legislative processes. when you get beyond the sexy

topic sure fighting over, 9% of the legislative work does not get all the headlines. there is a whole infrastructure with the ldp that has been there for decades. much of the internal organs of policy and legislative work do not exist in any mature way within did dpj, not to the same level. i think while you will have a few public hangings of bureaucrats, ultimately they beat it -- they end up becoming a vital part of it. i just wanted to throw that out there, that they will have a lot of handicaps. >> the dpj has had the luxury of not having to come to conclusions on key economic and foreign policies. there are a variety of views on all these issues we have been talking about. there is discussion on whether they should continue refueling

operations in the indian ocean, what to do about open now. i suspect what will happen is that the politicians will learn how to work with the bureaucracy. they will be the ones to have the information, inside, and power to actually govern and survived. but dpj has said they will have politicians on everything. the smart politicians will marry themselves to the right bureaucracy and get things done. kurt has articulated the right strategy for the obama administration. did not put pressure on, focus on the relationship between hatoyama and president obama. they will have to decide what to do about the indian ocean. they will have to make decisions about north korean policy. what worries me is having not resolve some of these internal contradictions, this new government may not be able to

come up with decisions, and as a default position will punt and pass on key decisions. i think steve is right. there are those in international organizations that we should be actively supporting. i disagree on the idea that that japan becoming difficult is good. a lot of that dpj narrative has been narrowly focused on the u.s.. what i hope will happen is that the new government will come in, step back, stop worrying about the u.s. so much, and think about whether their policies on afghanistan, economic reconstruction in iraq, on revitalizing their own economy, the international financial crisis, think about whether these are credible

internationally. what is credible to us will be credible to india, canada, korea, and i am hoping that will step out of the ofprism and think about what will make them credible globally. >> the other thing is, let's reflect that our new japanese friends in government are not just talking to us. they are talking to a range of other countries. . .

>> in my country, there is the same. if three people get together, it will create buddhist wisdom. [unintelligible] and the new government has not started yet. i am not in a position to interpret what mr. hatoyama was to say. but i was like to make a couple of points. on the economy, he is not

denying market forces, but if we leave everything to the market along, it will not be the best result for the people so there will need to be adjustments. and he was to care about others. and it is also here in the united states as well that government is having a bigger role in adjusting the economy. the second point is about the u.s.-japan relations. he is seeking constructive and future-oriented relations between japan and the united states. and i think it is true that there are some differences

between incumbent governments and the incoming government on some of these issues. however, what is most important is that dpj as well as lpldp sas that this will continue to be the cornerstone for the foundation of japanese foreign policy. my last point is that i can only say that in managing important relationships like that japan and the u.s., three points are important. [unintelligible] no surprise, no over criticizing, and lastly, no taking for granted. and i think that these are more true than ever when the two and

administration's get together. that is my final point. >> other questions from the audience? >> if you could, could you come up: you are holding your hand up. there you go. >> thank you. >> i think that it works. it is not working. >> thank you. [unintelligible] a simple but difficult question, particularly to dr. campbell. [unintelligible] continuing and increasing frustration, their sensitive issues such as okinawa for that

japanese and u.s. governments, and this brings any possibility that the japanese government will get some room to maneuver, such as more time to focus on the reload -- relocation issue, or to accept some new proposal from japan's new government to review some u.s. forces stationed -- stationing agreements. that's all. >> i will start on that. i know michael want to say something. first of all, one of the things they teach you at the state department is to repeat what your spokesman has said. [laughter] it took years to learn but i finally mastered it. on this particular issue, i would refer you to what our state department spokesman said

about our expectations. i would just say, however, there are expectations that we will make progress. the issues on okinawa have been with us a long time. we have made some progress and we would like to continue. it is very important to us and we feel like we'd have worked closely with the government and we will continue to work closely, but i would stand by the statement that our press secretary made yesterday. >> what is going to be the relationship between japan and china? i like to throw that on the table. >> it will be a fun and interesting rollercoaster ride. in my view, i think japan is going to be in a position where it has to try to work with other states including 1.1 billion new capitalists into a different arena. and somehow deal with china's

interest. i tell the joke that there was a real issue there, i was in beijing and visited the director of policy planning for foreign affairs. he was working on how to keep american distracted while we get into the smaller countries. [laughter] there was significant criticism fight japan -- by japan to the bush administration privately about the summit said asia. one of the things i was very pleased by was secretary clinton, she is doing it globally, of real presence, it going to japan first and being in asia, putting in face time. it really makes a difference, because there has been some distraction because of other issues. i think that that helps japan deal with china in its growth and its pretensions in the region. and japan is -- japan is going to invest in china, but i hope

you see more mature leadership on both sides. i have often said that one of the negative consequences and moral hazards of the strong military engagement in the region is that it prompts irresponsible behavior by korean, japanese, and chinese leaders who want to exploit on a short-term basis there let nationalism, because they know that there will not be conflict, because we are there. they know that they can get away with it. i hope that we move out of that phase. >> i hope that does not mean that -- anyway. [unintelligible] japan and china, have a high arc or -- and high art year-old -- hierarchial relationship.

japan is moving up, but china has an awful lot of power. there is it deep anxiety about china and japan. japanese ships are circling japan. beckham what japan and negotiations around the world. it is pretty broad. and at the same time, china has been japan's largest trading partner for about four years now. it is accomplished -- a complicated mix of rivalry and interdependence. it will not change very soon. the new government wants to move closer to china. they will not emphasized his streak issues. that is a good thing. it is safe -- is in our interest for china and japan to work together. steve is right when he says rollercoaster, because i am not sure how sustainable that is.

there is a danger that the -- that it hatoyama government ties to heart, they will provoke a reaction. complicated, rollercoaster, but some good interesting things. >> right here. >> a big follow-up to bob's question. the question is for secretary campbell and the palace. we all know that taiwan has been a long important factor in japan-china relationship, and u.s.-china relationships. at the see the taiwan being affected -- how do you see tie 1 being affected in this relationship and the new japan- u.s. relationships? thank you very much. >> i seek continuity in the u.s. cents.

i think the administration has started off very clearly in terms of our international commitments. we worked very closely over the course of the last several weeks in the humanitarian effort in response to the tragedy in taiwan, and i think you're going to say dialogue and appropriate interaction between the united states and taiwan. i am going to leave at the mike to talk about what we might expect to see between japan and taiwan and other countries. i would say one thing about the overall campaign, generally. there has probably been more of a focus on domestic issues and financial issues than there was on international issues. that does not mean anything necessarily, going forward, but as a general proposition that was the case. in terms of specifics, outside of u.s.-japanese relations, and

some general statements about wanting to have a closer relationship with asia, one of the positives in some respect for any incoming government is that they are unencumbered in some respects by and an enormous number of commitments. i don't think that there has been much said about this or other issues. i will leave it to mike and others to comment on that. >> i think that there will be a variety of views inside the dpj, just as there were a variety of views within the ldp and the republican democratic party is. if you are watching this closely, you need to see who is far and minister. some people in the dpj wanted to lot to improve relationships with china. there are others are quite close to taiwan. i will not knowing the names, but there are differing views on this. -- i will not go into names but there are differing views on this. it makes it easier on everyone

for taiwan policy, at least for now. i don't expect any big changes. >> ok, next question. here. she has got a mic there. >> reuters news agency. following on that same, you know -- this is probably a mike green question. the dpj is a broad umbrella of factions, some right wing. is it possible that there is a history view that they will deal with with asia, and it will raise hackles on the side of the party? you could have been doing something are saying something provided. the non-ldp government, they assembled a crew of right-wing people in their cabinet. >> i think there is breathing room on the history is you. i think that hatoyama's promise not to go to the shrine, it did

not cause great backlash. on this issue, there is a little bit of room on this issue. there will not be pressure within the dpj. but you are right to point out that there are very different views within the party. are probably 50 members of the party who are as concerned that at the -- conservative as the most conservative ldp. as kurtz suggests, they are going to focus on changing the domestic and political economy. the reality is that we are excited about the big change, but in three months or six months these guys will be gone possibly. there could be a dramatic realignment, and there is an upper house election next summer. if you are one of the architects of this victory and the guy who wants to win next year for the dpj, the you want this push foreign issues that would split

your party? you do not want to fight the obama administration. hatoyama as 50% support. there is not a political hack -- a lot of political hay to be made by a big fight with the u.s.. you will start to see some stealing away of a constituency groups from the ldp, and the karl rove of japan -- that is what he is really all about. [laughter] you're pointing out that point. in the early 1980's, henry kissinger wrote an article pointing today ldp, they had all these factions and each faction thought something different about policy. my first letter to a newspaper that was published, dr. kissinger, you're quite wrong. up actions were not driven by policy differences but power differences. henry kissinger's article, if it

was resurrected, would be completely true about the dpj today. it is not power and as a party, but an inquest -- it is not power within his party, but an incredible heterodoxy within his party, how to create conflict management mechanisms to move forward. we have seen that in the rotating leadership with many, they are going to have to figure brought out out. but it is other folks, too. i looked up at kissinger peace and bring it back. but that is a real handicap when it comes to moving -- and they have to figure out that sen. i don't think that they have. >> doctor -- dr. kissinger said -- called earlier and asked if you're going to repeat that. he always knows. >> it is also not clear that dpj will replicate exactly this

factional approach to politics that the lpga did -- that the lapd did. it makes it difficult to do the kind of policy concessions, dialogues, implementations that you see in successful democracies. i agree very much that the jury is still out and we will see, but this is an enormous party, with a very wide set of views on almost every imaginable issue. >> actions were easier. -- factions were easier. >> paul wolfowitz is coming up here. >> this is an address of the last question, but am curious whether you think that the desire for improved relationships with china might push beyond visits to the shrine.

it's starting to compare between china and germans -- and japanese, -- between germany and japan, what a great job the germans have done with dealing with their past and what a poor job the japanese have done. it might be more than just visits to the shrine? >> this history is you could take at least three generations to reconcile. i've never known how long a generation is, but i don't think that eric there yet. >> 20 years. >> well, not too long from now. the difference i think between japan and china and france and germany, is that the chinese have not done what france of this leak could do, which is internal reconciliation about their own history and history of the communist party. in my view, until china can reconcile internally, it will not happen to japan.

not to put all the burden on china, but that is one big obstacle. to this day and more debate that there is, the harder it is to keep people quiet. -- taboos fade, and the more debate there is, the harder it is to keep people quiet. or maybe we will been -- be in for a roller-coaster little while. the oilers back is a much. mike said he was going to write my question for me. so i am glad ask kurt -- i am going to ask her. one of the potential disconnects is how do we talk with north korea and about what? the administration has said that they would not talk to them except in terms of negotiations -- denuclearization.

there's a lot of pressure to see if that is possible to negotiate. it gets us into a chicken/egg problem. until the japanese have worked out how they're going to think about dealing with the north, it might help if you could walk us through this, how you see this problem at the moment, what is the difference between discussions and negotiations, and steve was worth going to talk but not deal unless they say in advance it will be about the bomb? >> much of this is very far ahead of where we are right now. it is well known to many people here, steve bosworth and the ambassador are on a plane today for consultation with our allies in japan and south korea, and china, to talk about the next eds. no commitments have been made about either talks, talks,

diplomacy negotiations at all. nothing, visiba a vis north korea. we present some ideas about how to go forward with everyone. i think the basics of that, chris, are still very clear. we are committed to the six party framework. we think that the most important agreements with north korea are embedded in that process, particularly in 2005. i think we are united in our belief that we must see commitments and a clear and firm commitment from north korea, backed up by irreversible steps, a commitment to nuclear-free in north korea. and we have other issues that we're going to want to discuss an association. overall, we are at the earliest

possible stages. which just came out of seven months of severe provocations. we continue to implement the u.n. resolution 1784, and i would underscore on that, despite some of the discretion about next steps in discussions or dialogues, one of the most interesting things that happened recently is other countries, not just in asia but in the middle east, are beginning to take steps to implement 1784, and aspects of other agreements. that is an agreement -- that is an indication that it did not just pass by countries in the middle east and elsewhere that appreciate and understand some of these provocative steps, if transfers of dangerous technologies, are not only bad for countries in the region but also globally. overall, what we will see over the course of the next several months are closer interactions with korea. they're clearly in the process of the body waiting their own a

interactions with." -- korea. china has been in the process of deep reflection on north korea for the past several months. and we have to give jack found -- japan sometime if they are going to put out a set of perspectives on north korea. we have to give them time and recognize that views on north korea and this process of five parties, it is essential to keep them engaged. that is where we are, chris. i cannot give to you in advance what it was like negotiations and specifics to various issues, because we are well before that in this process. >> all right, do we have any women that want ask a question? it's been an all-male show here. >> setting aside a larger security and economic issues for the moment, could you name a few

things in the short term that the japanese government can do to buy it -- to reassure the u.s.? you mention not throwing out that bureaucrats of the enemy, and are there other things that they could do it that we could see? >> michelle, i'm sorry. i did not recognize you. >> just on the issue of the bureaucrats, that is not a government-coordinated position on any part of the united states. we got together for this and we've got to keep the bureaucrats, that is not what i was suggesting. i was making a personal operation with people i have worked with. >> despite your job, nobody looks at you as a bureaucrat. >> i will leave that to decide. but there are other issues that i think we will look to see commitment on the part of japan. the u.n. general assembly is coming up. as both of my colleagues have underscored, japan's leadership role in the united nations is just essential.

and it is a leadership role. it is not make following role. they take a leadership role on a range of issue. we want to see that activism continue at the united nations. hopefully some evidence of that later this month. i like to see a continuing commitment from japan on climate change any issues associated, and the lead up to some very difficult negotiations in copenhagen. and there are range of other global health issues. we're coming into flu season and japan plays an incredibly important role in the early steps on h1n1. those are some basic steps, but overall, continuing a course that japan has been on will be an important contribution to the maintenance of peace and stability, and the act as global role. >> i think that -- i am not in the government so i can say this

-- the kind of town any "new york times" and the "huffington post" articles is all fine in the election campaign. we've said some things where we scratch our heads. some advisers say something in a speech, and everyone in the party regrets it. these things happen. [laughter] highlight examples. an early indication to me will be at this rhetoric stops when they come into power. it is not particularly helpful. in help explains the assault -- a philosophy spur you do not need it when you were in government. -- it helps to explain the philosophies. you do not need it when you are in government. it will be c -- you'll be interesting to see it that was keep the promises they made about stopping ships in the ocean. and when they start the administration about what they can do.

instead of saying, we got what it sink ships in the indian ocean, let's put that aside and let him we do in afghanistan? that type of proactive agenda with the obama administration, yes, we can, here is the kind of things that japan can do. it will be their decision, and there will be many. but right now my sense is that the interactions are, move away from the cannot do and start an agenda and dialogue about what you can do. that will immediately be recognized not all in the u.s. but others who want to keep japan in the international -- i was going to say fight, but in a problem-solving business internationally. >> the japan society in southern california had its anniversary recently. i went back to that dinner.

the ambassador was there and this is all cleared by him to put on the record. i had joked with him about the importance of taro aso, a former prime minister, being the first official guest at the white house. i asked him how high the price was? he said, that such decade-old thinking. we're not in any more. but in my view of what barack obama invited taro aso to have that place, is on the international economic questions. i do not believe that the global financial heart attack is over. i think that there are significant challenges ahead on how to deal with the problem of developing countries. japan cents on today the largest discretionary capital pile in the world, larger than china. in terms of financing, and japan has severe economic problems, but what it can do in the international economic order are absolutely vital. i think that in my view, japan has been somewhat internally

consumed and not playing at its weight in this international level. i think it needs to do partner'' incomes to words of a revitalized international economy, and japan has to move into that. i think that they are, and i think that they need to share their ability to play in that game. >> i would say one thing. i'm struck by this -- we are assuming, or at least i do, that we will have a past period, leisurely in a sense, where a new government can come up to speed. but the truth is that global politics has a way of testing new leaders, whether the united states or elsewhere. we do not know what we will have that luxury and japan or elsewhere. >> joe biden, -- in joe biden speak, you feel that in six months hatoyama will be tested.

[laughter] >> would you like to get this year -- thus the final question? >> i want to thank tcu and they school of journalism for sponsoring this. we're glad have you all back. you have denigrate job, bob, and we appreciate the school of journalism, but naming the school after you in assigning new this important task, working at csis. i had been reminded by the unanimous view that politicians should not on their own tried to frame questions, that we need bureaucrats and staff people for that purpose. [laughter] but i will close with one question, energy and the environment. did it come up in the campaign, or the nuclear issues? do you expect any significant change in the new government?

>> the headline from this camera, former bureaucrats as to japan, be good to former bureaucrats. hire more. [laughter] he made a good point about japan not getting credit for all that can do but all that it has done. significant pledges as to the imf. and the dpj in their manifesto one of the ldp and what they have pledged to date. they will find it very hard but they're definitely setting their step far forward on climate change. on nuclear power, it will be interesting. the dpj has a bit of a mixed set of views on nuclear power in japan. but japan will generally keep moving in the direction of more nuclear power.

they have pointed out a lot as signals that they wanted to more on reducing weapons on article 6 of the treaty. not a lot of specifics yet come but a lot of potential there for u.s. and other countries to work to see what japan can do in terms of realistic policies to reduce nuclear weapons and to deal with proliferation. i agree with what they have put out, but the mainstream in japan is still very concerned about the credibility of an extended nuclear deterrent. we should not be confused by this. there is an idealistic overlay and the environmentalists, [unintelligible] this is a really ripe area for us to not only reassure japan but for curt and others to come up with a proactive agenda to take some of these ambitious views that then new government

has a nuclear weapons and put them into practice. >> very quickly. i agree with everything that my cassette on nuclear weapons. on the environment, these were big issues. the dpj was talking about quality of life issues at the local level, trying to improve that, but also a jumping from that to the global quality of life. it sounded very obamaesque. hatoyama sounds like a very obamaesque character. they see a lot of opportunities to make given japan's different skill sets and strengths, of being the innovative and driving force of a green economy, much more friendly than the united states is in a position to bid. when energy and environment, they see these things as areas of collaborations, strengths, skills. we recently had -- and they look at the direction that the united states is moving in, but people

saying that we will give you our technology to make that work in the united states. they see all of this is a business-economic died -- opportunity. dpj had been chomping at. -- trumpeting that. >> i hope that we have the same number people here for the next panel and that we can sustain this interest. >> as long as you are here, they will be here. >> i am sure that that is the case. [laughter] i think both of my college for being here. >> we thank you all, thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> c-span continues its look at health care. "washington journal" looks at health care from hospitals perspective. tonight, a look at emergency room and then i talk with steny hoyer. see his answers tonight at about 9:30 p.m. eastern on c- span. and tomorrow, vice-president

biden talks about the progress of the economic stimulus and the overall state of the economy. c-span and c-span radio will have live coverage starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> later this week, a review of the health-care debate in congress, with highlights from house and senate committees and analysis from capitol hill reporters. and don "q&a," a comparison of health care systems from around the world, when it bought former washington post reporter t.r. reid. >> the status quo is unacceptable. >> house speaker nancy pelosi said today that her version of legislation will include a public option. she spoke with reporters afterwards. this is almost a half hour. >> the cost of entitlement is skyrocketing.

right now we have an opportunity for change which is an opportunity not only of a lifetime, but a historic opportunity. the president has said, he has called for quality, affordable, accessible health care that will lower costs, improve quality, expand coverage, and retain choice. if you like what you have, you can keep it. we see health care as the competitiveness issue, whether for our businesses, especially small businesses, some provide health care and some do not, but he is the competitiveness issue, and for those who do, even in moderate to larger size businesses, it is a big, big administrative cost. it is the competitiveness issue as we compete nationwide. for individual families and their needs, businesses and

their competitiveness and making good business decisions based on attracting the best possible talent, for our economy to have the dynamism of people who are able to be entrepreneurial because they are not job locked. how many people do you know who set out like to change jobs but i cannot leave the health plan that i have now, because my child has diabetes and someone in my family is by pollard, any pre-existing condition -- bipolar, any pre-existing condition? we want people to have the talent that have -- to start a small business, to be able to change jobs and not a can be confined but for that individual, for those businesses, for and -- and for our economy to be confined. the big issue is a public option. i have said over and over again, and i commit to this, that the

bill that will pass the house of representatives will have a public option in it. [applause] again i support what the president has said. he said that he believes that the public option is the best way to keep the insurance companies honest, to increase competition in order lower-cost, expand coverage, and retain choice. he has also said that if you have a better way of doing it, put it on the table. and of course we are always open to a better way of achieving those goals. so far we have not seen it. and so when we go back, we will be working to bring our three bills to gather that have passed three different committees of the house, to bring to the floor with the public option. he will be interesting for you to know that in the legislation,

we wanted to be very innovative. we are talking about comparative effectiveness, we are talking about quality, not quantity of health care -- the value, not volume of procedures. we're talking about the willingness of the person, not necessarily the utilization of procedures. and so that is how we hope to reduce some of the costs. there are disparities in the medicare reimbursement that we have to address in the bill, and some of that relates to this utilization issue. we have strong commitment to prevention and wellness. it is about by at and not about diabetes. it is about prevention, not amputation. it is about early intervention. i am so pleased that in the legislation we have no copayment, no cut pay for

prevention services. that is very important. but again, these issues relate to how we feed our children, about how we educate them about wellness, how we ourselves take responsibilities for our good health. that our reforms in the package that are very important. -- there are reforms in the packets that are very in one. an insurance company will not be able to prohibit you from having health insurance because you have a pre-existing medical condition. [applause] as i said before, no copayment for prevention services. you cannot get your insurance rescinded just because you get sick. i dunno how they call that insurance.

you paid a premium, you get sick, they suspended coverage. no longer can that happen. there are other provisions if you pay your premium, they cannot cut you off. those reforms are very important. it is very important in the broadest sense of that term. there is a cap on what you pay in. there is no cap on the benefits you receive. their yearly cap, no lifetime cap. -- no yearly cap, no lifetime cap. this is very important to the disability community. this is a very excellent proposal. i am sure that you have heard that when it comes to senior, aarp has not endorsed any particular bill but they have endorsed health insurance reform. it is absolutely necessary for our country. a particular interesting part

are the provisions on small business. i will not go into it except to say that you have it in your folder. but what we tried to do in legislation -- and it is evolving so i invite your suggestions and comments -- not right here because you are in the middle of a panel, but you can convey them to my office -- what we tried to do there is to recognize that over half of people who are not insured, they are people who work with small businesses or to pose a small businesses. we had a woman come to speak to it -- at one of our offense is said that she had a small business, a coffee shop, she had 70 employees. she had to take a part-time job someplace else in order to get health insurance for herself. what we want to do is make it affordable, and that is what we do in the legislation.

95% of small businesses will not be subjected to any surcharge in this legislation. some will. and as you read over the page, let me know what you think. but we do see it as an emancipation, a liberation for business in america, to have health care be much more affordable. and we do this, in my view, through the public option which is insureer of competition. we all had this exchange where people can go to get their insurance, just as members of congress do. there will be subsidies at some level and we are debating what that level is and what level of income and what the amount of the subsidies will be. and again, there will be

stimulus for the insurance companies to compete and for costs to come down. it is absolutely essential that we contain costs as we go forward. the bill will be limited in terms of what it will cost. it will belie below $1 trillion. over 10 years, all over -- about $500 billion of that will come from savings. squeezing savings out of the system. and i think that prevented the issues -- a provision issues, the cbo does not give you credit for them, but as we do that, we will have the bill paid for. this bill over the 10-year

period, it will be paid for. we must at the same time been the curve of cost -- bannend the curb costs. it is a great thing to pay for this bill, but we must the bend the current cost. it is important to the national economy into the national budget. the president has said, rightly so, that health care reform is entitlement reform. unless we can bend that curve of 2% over inflation, the rising cost of health care and are country, unless we can turn that around, we will have at unsustainable. this is an unsustainable increase to our deficit. we want to reverse that.

it is an exciting opportunity. we're listening carefully across the country to legitimate concerns that people have about cost and coverage and what this means to them. if you are a senior, if you are a veteran, if you are arrested and, if your young person -- and -- if you are young person. that is leadership in the country. we have a moral imperative to do this. the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world, great economic leader of the developed world, the only one that does not have access to quality, affordable health care for our people. and i intend to do so. as you all know, being here and hearing from health care professionals as you are in the midst of doing now, i understand, we have an america

that has to be proud of our health care system in terms of what we can do. but we have to be even prouder about what we can do for all americans. as we invest more heavily and basic research to get the answers, to invest in technology that will give as customized, personalized care, and the comparative effectiveness that we will have to have quality, not quantity, not over utilization, but the appropriate remedy for people -- that we will do this -- we have are to begin in our recovery package in january, a vast infusion of funds into the community health centers, which will be how we reach out to people to bring them in. a commitment to a common electronic record, that everyone

in america is a part of, so that we understand the health of america and what we can learn from it, and we understand that the most privileged person in america's health care is improved when the poorest person in america has access to health care as well. we learn from each other. [applause] electronic medical records for individuals. but we have to think and and entreprenuers real wage. -- in an entrepreneurial way. we have to say, let's keep what works, let's change what is not working, let's do it now, and people talk about what happened in the early 1990's. technology has taken us so far from that place. it has increased our possibility to such an extent. even a fax location.

our community health centers are able to provide better care because they have their records right there. they are in place, electronically. working people, who do not have time to make appointments and go long distances, can have the health care closer, sooner, and therefore making them healthier. this is not just about changing health care and health insurance in america. it is about making america a healthier. we're very excited about the possibility of the president's leadership. this is the legislative process and it is pretty exciting. at the end of the day, i know that our measure of success will be the progress that is made in each and every family in america, to make them healthier, to give them more financial stability, because they know they would not pauperized by one

telephone call, one diagnosis, one accident -- that their lives would be changed. it's not be that they have to stress -- it should not be that they have the stress of economic concerns as well. i thank you for your interest in the subject. i look forward to hearing from you on some of these issues. i say to those who are talking about doing a little bit and a little bit, and they say, lyndon johnson settled for half a loaf when he did medicare. why don't we settle for half a loaf? this is the other half of that loat. [applause] i am not into giving out slices of bread. that is what you do when you start putting off the other half of the loaf.

we want something that works for the american people. i hearken back to martin luther king talking about the fierce urgency of now. this is the time for us. we must do it. the president use that " quite a bit in his campaign and in his presidency. that was the rest of his of and what i have a dream" speech. the rev. martin luther king went on to say that he -- we must beware of the luxury of gradualism. we must be bold. we intend to be bold and do it right. we intend to make america healthier. thank you for the opportunity to speak once again. and we will have a public option. [applause] >> only 40% of americans are now

supporting this health care plan. [inaudible] >> we are in the game. i am very pleased about what is happening nationwide. you hear about some of the been of this region din -- din of this nation wide, but they have listened to what americans have had to say and will bring back suggestions from their districts. but we are ready to go. i was pleased with the polls this morning, 53-36 support eight its public option. i'm very excited about that. we go in the session next week, and we will immediately begin bringing the bills together and taking it to the floor of the house. >> grassley and others on the republican side, using to indicate that they are walking away. >> well, you beat that judge.

i think the remarks are self- evident. >> to you think that they are? >> if the -- the present has placed a high premium on striving for bipartisanship, and i agree with him. he has tried everything that he can. he is given a long time to work and hopefully he can achieve some of it. i don't characterize what is happening in the senate on the republican side. i want to talk on the house side. we're very excited about the strength of our bill, the enthusiasm of our members, and our prospects for success. we will have a bill. the oilers will b>> will there e public option? >> i am not sure -- i don't know about any changes to the public option. as i have said right from day one, the president has set the public option is the best way to

treat the insurance -- to keep the insurance companies on its. as a way to increase competition, to have a better cause, broader coverage, and retain the choice that people have. if they like what they have, they can keep it. and if you have a better way to keep -- to do this, put it on the table. i think the public option keeps this all together. what we wanted to ask four respects, and do in an exchange which provides subsidies to enable the affordability and accessibility and the equality for all americans. >> some of your own members in a more conservative districts said they do not support a public option. >> we will have the public option in the bill. the bills that passed the three committees, with great diversity is on our committees, in every

way the diversity is represented there in all three of our committees. we have come out with the public option. we will have the public option. let me say at another way, we cannot pass the bill without the public option on a salmon comes up with a better idea, which we have not heard yet. >> [unintelligible] if costa not get lower, then there could be some triggering mechanism. is there some wiggle room? >> the insurance companies have had a very long time to demonstrate their sense of responsibility to the greater good. i think that they have demonstrated that we need a public option. i respect what the senator is

saying, and my understanding among those who support a trigger is that it would be at very robust public option wind comes in. it was not one of these pull the trigger, and one of those little flags pop out. they may prefer a compromise to a more robust one later one. all this is to be negotiated. our committees have passed out bills and we're waiting to see the second committee in the senate. as we go back, we're working on that now, going back to our members and find our consensus, take it to the floor. and then we go to congress. the senate will work its will, and it is really important for the leadership of the president of united states. without his leadership, we would

not be where we are, police to do something very historic. i am very confident about that -- poised to do something very historic. i am confident about that. i think that he has heard what everyone are concerned about, and first and foremost, the american people. i am quite certain that we will be hearing from the president soon. and now was the time to say, here are the choices. we have many excellent ideas. we have not find an amount of money to spend. we must lower caught -- had a finite amount of money to spend. we must have lower costs. it's not about everything to put into the bill. it is about the priorities. to chooses to govern or tech govern is to choose. with this array -- to choose is to govern or to govern is to

choose. he will weigh in and tell us his perspective that he wants to sign into law. but do not bee distracted by one thing in another. it will happen. it will be great and it will be soon. >> the stopping and restarting of patriotic music? >> i have never been on in the elevator in the capital that had music. it was news to me that they had music on the capital. i think it is perfectly appropriate, but i have been there 22 years and i have not heard a single node on any elevator in the capital or in the capitol complex. i think that is the individual choice of members. [unintelligible]

>> by the main congressional district? obviously you and i are not fully up-to-date on what this is. we're trying to address i climate change prices, reform health care and america, bill the education -- the three pillars of the president's budget. we get past the energy bill in the house, we are about to pass health care, and we will pass the education bill soon. i just haven't had time to listen on the phone to what music is playing. .

>> the american people have been waiting a very long time for this remedy. their hopes and aspirations are for a health care reform. you hear some who do not believe in government having a role in it, and that is their legitimate belief. you have others to question conditions in this bill and the costs, and that is legitimate. but the fact is, we will measure our success by the progress made in america's families for their own economic stability, and health care costs are related to their economic stability. it is too late already in terms of not passing 44 years ago when

medicare passed, but it will happen in a timely fashion. i have every confidence that that will be the case, they will make a difference in the lives of the american people, and it will be important to our business community, which is important to our economy, and it will be important to lower the entitlement cost to our country. it is pretty exciting, and i never look forward to leaving california, but it is exciting to get back to washington and put all this into place as we go forward, under the leadership of barack obama, to whom we are eternally grateful to making -- for making this important issue that it is in his agenda. >> as the debate over health care continues, c-span is health care hub is a key resource. go online, follow the latest tweets, video ads, and links.

share your thoughts on the issue with your own citizen video, including video from any town halls you have gone too. there is more at c-span.org. >> tonight's c-span continues its coverage on health care with a look at emergency health care. it begins at 8:00 eastern. then a health care 10 -- town hall with steny hoyer at about 9:30 eastern. tomorrow, vice president biden talks about the progress of the economic stimulus and the overall state of the economy. c-span and c-span radio will have live coverage starting at about 10:00 eastern. in more than a dozen works, national book award winner johnston -- jonathan kozol has create -- critique the american

educational system. state department spokesman ian kelly said today that the secretary of state was only recently made aware of allegations of misconduct by guards at the u.s. embassy in afghanistan. the charges are detailed in a report from an outside watchdog group called project on government oversight. this is about 45 minutes. >> that afternoon. let me start off talking a little bit about the allegations that were raised by the project on government oversight. as i said before, we take these allegations extremely seriously. in fact, we have documented a number of management concerns through our ongoing oversight of this particular contract. there are a number of investigations that are under way, both here and out in kabul,

and we expect to seek prompt and effective action taken as a result of these investigations. we expect there'll be some changes. a senior team from diplomatic security and our bureau of management and contracting officials will be going to cobble -- to kabul to investigate. they will work very closely with the office of inspector general , who is also investigating this. in addition, ambassador eikenberry has instructed his senior staff to examine the allegations and report back to him. he is also having a town hall tomorrow with staff to discuss this situation and the allegations and expressed his

determination to correct management deficiencies. to be clear, there were some things going on in kabul which we were not aware of, but we should have been aware of them. i would like to stress that all along, any problems that we did discover throughout this contract, we did promptly raise with the contractor, and they were immediately addressed. you saw some of these deficiencies in the report of pogo, regarding some of the communications we have had with the contractor. just to remind everybody, afghanistan is a very dangerous place. it is also important that we believe that the embassy in kabul has been well protected. we believe americans and others

working at the embassy had the security that they need. we have a number of investigations going on, and will keep you abreast of the developments as weekend. >> what could you have known about that you did not know about? >> if you look at the president obama report -- if you look at the pogo report, all the documents we shared with senator mccaskill and senator collins, and these deficiencies were mostly in the area of language ability, and we did ask them to take corrective measures. they are insuring that each of their teams as a supervisor who has fluid english. they are also requiring english language lessons for some of

these third country nationals. obviously, the most distressing thing with the very disgusting photographs we saw about the events of mid-august, i do not think any manager or leader anywhere wants to learn about serious morale problems via some third party. those are the kind of issues that we have to address. >> how much is this contract worth? >> i can be that a information. >> while you are looking for that, what kind of exchange it -- what kind of changes do you expect will be made? will some kind of punitive action be taken by people inside the department it responsible

for what you described as continuing oversight, which appears to have not been continuing? >> on the last point, i am not sure i agree with you. we have document all these deficiencies and ask them to take corrective measures. some of the information in the pogo report of the events of the last few weeks, and some of the testimony of employees, anonymous testimony of employees, that is the new information. as far as what we will do, we have a number of investigations going on. as with any contract, we have a number of options available to us. whether or not we exercise those options, i do not know. certainly, there are a number of options available, including replacing personnel, rebidding the contract, but where these various in guest of --

investigations will come up, i do not know. regarding your question, the contract value is $189 million. the length of it is one year, with four one-year option periods. we are 2.5 years into it. it was initially signed march 12, 2007. i believe that is the overall amount. >> he said that the most distressing thing about this was the very disgusting photographs that emerged. to a lot of people, what is more distressing is the fact that nothing seems to have been done about it. that is the crux of what pogo was saying, that there was no oversight. you say that there was oversight, but in fact, these problems date back two years, or at least some of them do. things went from bad to worse, with the pictures that you

called disgusting. >> the event that is depicted so graphically in those photographs to place a couple of weeks ago. we learned of the event about a week or 10 days ago, and we immediately open investigation. we passed the materials over to the appropriate party. rex the secretary was aware of this two weeks ago? when did she become aware of this? >> as i enter stand it, it was very recently. >> would that be a stray morning? >> i want to be sure i give you the right answer. -- would that be yesterday morning? can you describe her reaction on being apprised of it?

>> there is 1000 diplomatic staff. they must be pretty worried. >> we do not believe that security has been compromised. given some of the information in the report about problems of morale, this could have led to problems further down the line, but in terms of providing adequate security, we believe that security was not compromised. regarding the reaction of the embassy, ambassador eikenberry is very cognizant of the kind of impact that this kind of story would have on the staff and families there, so this is one is having the town hall tomorrow. i cannot say there is quite a

lot of worry, but as a leader, he wants to assure his people that we are taking this seriously and will get to the bottom of it. >> how can you say that it was not compromised, when the state department itself, going back to 2007, said i consider the contract efficiencies addressed below to endanger performance of the contract to such a degree that the security of the u.s. embassy and kabul is in jeopardy. >> as i said, we have documented the problems we have seen with the performance of this contractor. we have had frequent meetings with them. we have put in writing some of these concerns. i think there have been eight deficiency letter sent to them. it was our determination that they have addressed these concerns. >> so, did they lie to you?

>> these were deficiencies that could be addressed with appropriate measures, language, training, making sure that enough people there to command post and not have to draw upon the resources of the embassy to fill these gaps. all along, we have taken this seriously, and they have responded. >> but you said there have been a deficiency notices. how does that square with am responding? how you justify renewing the contract when there were a deficiency notices? >> the only way we can justify renewed the contract is that they put in place the measures to address the deficiencies. >> can you say when these eight letters were sent?

>> i said a, but there were six. i am sorry, is 8. >> how many deficiency letters does it+ take before you get fired? >> i think if they do not address the deficiencies, that would mean the firing. let me finish. the fact that we issued these letters show that we were keeping an eye on this, and any kind of problems -- we take any kind of problems very seriously. we tell them they had to address the problems. >> can you say when they were sent? >> starting in june 2007, all the way through april 30, 2008.

actually there was a night, and this was the most serious one -- eight -- there was a ninth. the issuance of the notice was necessary due to repeated staffing shortages, which had been brought to the attention of the contracting officer. the notice was the first step towards considering termination of the contract. >> when was that? >> this was september 21, 2008. >> this contract is said was signed originally in march of 2007, so three months into the

contract is in the first deficiency notice? >> yes. kabul is a very challenging environment. there are serious challenges for recruitment and logistical challenges. >> the last letter that was sent to them -- they responded to that and corrected the deficiencies? >> they corrected the deficiencies. >> you started to say you put up with these deficiencies because she had no other alternative. was there no -- >> there are other options. obviously, we cannot just terminate any contract anywhere from any embassy, because we cannot have our embassies unprotected. there is an issue where you have

to transition to another arrangement, and of course, the universe of organizations that can provide this kind of very challenging security and challenging environment is not a very big universe. >> you have had the incidents with blackwater, and now you have this company. it begs the question of whether contractors should be used in these circumstances. is the state department at this point looking at that overall question? isn't there a message here that this probably is not working right way? >> i would take issue with that. obviously we have real concerns with this group in kabul, but we have probably 200 missions

overseas, 30,000 contractors -- obviously what happened in kabul was distressing, and contains some very serious charges. the most important thing for us is that our people are safe. as i said before, we do not believe that security was compromised. i think we are going to be taking a bigger look at this overall issue, but whether or not we move to another arrangement, i just cannot say right now. >> can you explain why it took two years to refer this to the investigation, if you had eight or nine letters, why did it take two years before you referred this to oig?

>> let's differentiate between performance or lack thereof or deficiency their of and an actual wrongdoing. we have been providing real man coverage on the skies, -- on these guys. >> that was probably an unfortunate term. >> very close oversight of this contract, but what we saw an aug. with the photographs, i think that is a whole different problem. >> we clarify then, what exactly is being investigated? is this some of the deficiencies you talked about, or specifically what you have seen in the address of the the last couple of months? >> there are two things.

one is the conduct issued, a very serious problem of the apparently very disgusting conduct. then there is the issue of management, of leadership, of what we have seen in the pogo report of the problems of morale and harassment. >> if those were issues, especially the morale and management, that go back to years, why not investigate those then? >> not from what i have seen. the issue that has gone on for two years has been more the deficiencies in performance and morale. >> the discrepancy between what some folks were say that they were notified yesterday, and you say there are notified 10 days ago. can you just clarify that it was 10 days ago that oig --

>> you may be right. i may have misspoke on that. let me what back a little bit. -- let me walk back a little bit. the contracts organization came to us with the pictures 10 days ago. they came to the state department. >> one of the key lines of defense that you started with was that we have investigations underway. it is really important to understand windows began, if indeed they began 10 days ago or just yesterday when this became public, which kind of undermines the argument that you had this very strong oversight. what are the relevant investigations? there are three that you have

referred to, won the team leading from here, too, the inspector general, and three, ambassador eikenberry's senior staff, and when those were ordered. >> just to clarify, you were saying that security is not currently compromise, because repeating staffing shortages have been addressed. >> even when there were staffing shortages, this was an issue of nonfulfillment of contract. we did fill the gaps. we did man the posts, but they came from within the embassy. it was supervisory personnel. >> the company did not do it itself? >> the company now is doing it, but there were a number of instances. >> so while there were staffing shortages from the companies point of view, the embassy ashley philbin -- the embassy

actually filled in. >> we also deducted their contract by that amount, docked their pay. >> you docked the pay for the number of people that they were missing. >> for the number of man hours that they had not covered. that came to about $2.4 million deducted from the contract. >> how are they chosen? do you have any say in that? do you have a ballpark figure? >> i am sorry, i do not. >> was there any guarantee that they would be able to communicate english or pashtun? this whole notion of having to pantomime at one of the most dangerous outposts is god

smacking -- gobsmacking. was everything in the original contract that specify that they had to meet some minimum level of communication skills, or was it simply go out and hire the cheapest people you confined and plop them down in the middle of kabul? will it be revisited for other embassies? >> i do not know exactly what was in the contract. obviously we want to have people with at least minimal english language skills. >> the contracts organization came to the state with the photographs 10 days ago, and you are talking about wackenhut.

they come to you with the photographs, which up until this point we thought were collected by pogo. can you characterize for the got the photographs are from? can you tell us, what did they say? >> i cannot tell you, i just do not know. i think we have to contact them and ask them what they said. >> be set at the beginning that there are things that occurred they did not know about and frankly should have known about. i still do not understand, were those photographs and the events of august? or was it other things they should have known about but didn't? >> i think it is mostly these morale issues that are referred

to the that i referred to, these kinds of complaints that are documented in a letter to secretary clinton. as i said before, i do not think any manager wants to learn about these kind of complaints from his or her people, from the media. we cannot know everything, but it would seem to me that this is the kind of issue that would really affect emission -- 8 mission -- a mission, and a leader has to be aware of these things. >> when was ambassador eikenberry informed of this? >> that, i do not know. we had problems with this contract, as i was discussing for quite some time.

he has obviously been briefed on an issue which is fundamental to the security of this mission. this contract goes back to 2007. >> in retrospect, do you think it was the right decision to renew the contract? >> my colleagues made the decision to renew the contract based on the information they had at the time. they were satisfied that the contractor was providing adequate security for the embassy. >> about the same time, you were under great scrutiny by the senate homeland affairs subcommittee, at the same time you were renewing the contract.

now senator mccaskill is saying the state department is not providing the majority of documents they need to continue their investigation. >> i don't think senator mccaskill said she has requested documents. >> she had a letter to pat kennedy yesterday saying the department has failed to comply with the majority of the subcommittee's request. >> will have to address that right away. i was not aware that we had not complied with all requests. i knew she had requested more information. >> is it fair to say that the m investigation and the results of it could determine whether or not you terminate his contract? >> that is an option that we have available to us. >> when you talk about one of the options for action in this being revetting the contract, does that mean the entire contract it's really competed, or do you review the actual contract?

>> it means it can be we competed at any time -- recompeted at any time. >> you could exclude wackenhut from the competition? >> that, i do not know. >> i just wanted to clarify that the black water contract in iraq, a couple of weeks ago, you seemed pretty clear that another company would take over the contract. when did you realize you had the certification and manning issues that made impossible to move the blackwater people out on schedule? >> as you know, we had arranged for a temporary extension of the contract, which i understand is called the u.s. training center.

as you know, this was supposed to transition out today -- tomorrow. they came to us and ask for additional time last week. >> it was extended for how long? >> it is mostly an equipment issue, as i understand it. the exact time, i did not know. i will say that is a temporary extension. >> >> have a registered an objection? >> i am not aware that they have registered an objection. >> who is paying for the transition? >> according to the contract,

dynacorp was supposed to take over tomorrow. we will have to look at and just that contract. i do not have the details. >> when did you grant the extension? >> i am not sure exactly when we grant the extension, but i know that there are a number of things that had to happen. we had to talk to the people from z and we had to talk to the host country, to iraq. >> how much is the extension worth? >> i do not know. >> how much time did they say they needed? >> i do not know.

>> how long do you expect a temporary extension to last? >> i really do not know. it all depends on with the equipment can arrive and other factors. >> what kind of equipment is it? >> i am not sure exactly. this is an aviation services contract, so we want to make sure we do this right. this affects the security of my comrades out there at embassy in baghdad. >> is just aviation services? >> there are some grounds services associated with the aviation services. the ground service is part of their contract. >> so this is mostly shoppers? >> it is mostly choppers. >> this transition has been underway for months. the state department made a big point of saying blackwater would not be a big secretary clint has

addressed it publicly at a town hall meeting. -- secretary clinton has addressed it. now you have the new contractor come in and tell you they are not ready. isn't there some sense of surprise or anger on the part of the state department? >> we are disappointed that we cannot transition to a new contractor as we have been saying we wanted to do all along. i believe it is mostly a logistical issue, and again, you have a lot of challenges about getting things in and out of iraq. it is my understanding is mostly a logistical issue. >> doesn't this raise some systemic questions about the way that security is carried out to take care of foreign service employees and local hires around the world? doesn't there need to be a re- examination of this whole question? there have been a lot of

problems. >> they are having problems, but for me, as a foreign service officer, the main thing is that we do not have gaps in the kind of protection that we give our people overseas. obviously we have had problems with various contractors. >> with the problems are not just in terms of affecting people. >> i think our people overseas are being served very well by diplomatic security in terms of protecting them. >> but is it also serving the overall mission and the overall goals of the united states, we have organizations coming in, in the case of black water, who were not subject to local law in iraq until the new government came in and set now we are changing this, and you have concerns about communication,

questions of legal authority, legal accountability. >> you are right. those are important issues, and we need to do better job of that. >> afghanistan's debbie chief was killed -- deputy chief was killed today. is the taliban growing in strength there? >> in relation to the previous subject, it is a very challenging environment in afghanistan, but we are committed to implementing the president's strategy, which is helping afghanistan develop its own institutions, giving the u.s. troops and nato troops the were all that they need, helping

train the afghan army and the afghan national police to be able to take over responsibility for their own security. it is a serious situation, but we remain committed to the job. >> is anything new on the official declaration of a coup for steps like that? >> i do not have anything to announce their. let me just say that we have already taken the steps that we need to take to remain in compliance with the law, which is that we have suspended all aid that goes to support the government of honduras. we are already in compliance with the law, but the secretary has not magic determination --

has not made a determination yet. >> the law does not say that you can suspended. the law says that if there is a determination, you have to terminated. i have the statute right here. it is not a suspension. i believe the word used is terminate, but i can double check that. the $80 million is dwarfed by the potential funds under the millennium challenge corporation. there is a lot more out there that it is potentially affecting. >> it is my understanding that as long as we are not providing aid to the government of honduras, we are in conformance with the law. >> does that mean a determination has not been made, or that one has been made and you are not in a position to talk about it?

>> a determination has not been made. >> if there is no negotiated solution, and the whole the elections, is the u.s. prepared to recognize the winter at? >> -- recognize though winner? >> it will be done in consultation with our partners in the region. we are still focused on our main goal, which is the restoration of the democratic and constitutional order, the return of president zelaya. we are doing whatever we can to try and reach that end, but we will want to work very closely with our partners in the oas in the region. >> you have a time for the meeting tomorrow?

>> it is midday, i do not have an exact time. >> today, president thalia said that the coup leaders are taking the administration seriously administration seriouslyzelaya -- president zelaya. they are not going to do what the u.s. is urging them to do. this is pretty serious. they are basically ignoring the united states, so how does the state department it is what do they think about that? >> we continue to believe that by calling on all the various actors involved in the political life by using leverage, such as the kind of leverage we have and by acting multilaterally through the organization of american states, by starting to apply

some other diplomatic means of pressure to suspending aid to the government' and reviewing or visa procedures and revoking some pieces -- by using all these forces that we can help that de facto leaders come to the right decision. that is accepting the san jose accord. in other words, we have not given up yet on this. >> i apologize, it does not say terminate. >> as part of your investigation, are you looking into an incident that happened in baghdad where a drunken security guard apparently shot two of his security guard colleagues in the green zone last month? is that part of your investigation? >> that would be a separate investigation.

i will have to see if we can get more information on that. the quick answer is, no, we are looking at our group in afghanistan. --. armor -- we are looking at armor group in afghanistan. >> presumably, the contract is with you guys. at this point, asking armor through anything -- >> i do not have any information about iraq.

>> some of those countries are places where they are both embassies and consulates. did they do security for embassies and consulates in those countries? >> i just have information on the capitals. >> there is an iranian press reports that the obama administration has sent a second letter to the regime in tehran. can you confirm that? as i do not have any knowledge of a letter. >> there are reports quoting a german official saying they expect iran to meet with representatives before the un general assembly. >> i was able to talk to bill burns. he said it was a constructive meeting, and most of the focus was on ways to get iran back to the table.

they took note of the latest report of the iaea director- general, and again called on iran to engage in direct talks, based on mutual respect. they reaffirmed their political goal and underline the necessity to achieve results of a diplomatic track. they stressed that a negotiated solution is still open to iran, with reference to the statement this week that iran is ready to resume talks. they stressed that iran should respond to the offer by agreeingjvrd -- i am sorry, lete start that over. they expected iran to respond to talks in april by agreeing to meet before the un general assembly meeting. they stressed the right of iran

to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, but that iran should be aware of the urgent need to restore confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its programming through full cooperation with the international community. i do not know about: a deadline, but it is certainly giving them a time frame. it is i do not know if i would call it a deadline. >> does that mean that there is reason to expect that the iranians will meet with them before the un, or are you saying that that you want them to or that they should respond? there is no expectation right now that there will be such a meeting? >> no, i used the wrong word. >> it does have to be clear as to if it was a statement or just

a whole. >> we urge iran to respond to the offer rebates if they do not respond, then you will start discussing sanctions? >> i am not going to predict what we will do, but right now the offer is still on the table. we are urging iran to respond. >> did the statements that came out yesterday that they want to have a meeting -- do not recognize that caused more >> we are waiting for an official response to the offer for talks. no response has arrived. >> the you have a reaction to the director general of iaea saying the threat of nuclear weapons program in iran has been exaggerated crist remarks i have not seen those remarks, so i do not have a response. >> there was a " that they agreed to meet -- does that mean

the political directors or the foreign ministers plan to meet in new york? >> i would expect the p five plus one meeting. >> does the u.s. support or oppose the nomination? >> i will have to find out. i do not have a read out, because he has just left. i can give you background on what he plans to do. he is going first to china and will be in beijing september 3 and 4, departing on the fourth four seoul. he will go to tokyo on september

6 and returned to washington on september 8. on september 8, ambassador kim will return to seoul where he will be with the russian--- federations special representative to the six party talks. it was suggested that they meet in seoul. >> in your state and you put out earlier budget statement you put out earlier, you made reference to his role of bringing the north koreans back to the table. why is he being touted in the role of six party talks? >> we have a number of tools at our disposal to try and get the

north koreans to do the right thing and return to the six party talks. we seen the efforts of ambassador goldberger in coordinating in the region and implementing the un security council resolution as reinforcing the other diplomatic efforts. >> his role is still just the sanctions? he has not expanded his role crist remarks he is coordinator of the security council role. >> what does he stay in the region -- >> is a logistical issue. >> to the russians not like kim -- to the russians not like him?

sun kim will go with him and stay -- >> he is going to all the different stops. he will go back to souls of began me with his counterpart. >> why is ambassador basra coming back -- comingbosworth? >> he is coming back to consult. >> here, or in massachusetts? >> i am not going there. >> none of the delegation members have any plans to go to north korea or meet with north korean officials on this trip. >> what is the agenda of this trip?

>> it is basically to continue consultation with our partners and allies on how best to convince north korea that has to live up to the commitments it made under the 2005 joint statement, and take irreversible steps toward a neat -- denuclearization. we were going out there to consult with our partners on the best way forward. we will see what comes out of those talks. >> the have a date on senator mitchell's meeting? -- do you have a date? >> it will be late this afternoon, 5:00 up in new york. i would get a readout. >> any specific place for the meeting?

>> i believe is that the u.s. mission to the un 3 >> how you assess the overall atmosphere in efforts to revive these talks as they prepare for the meeting? >> i do not want to step on anything that may be a subject for talks. you saw their statement last week that they thought that progress had been made. we are very much looking forward to moving to the next state of direct talks. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> in a few minutes, at 8:00 eastern, c-span continues its coverage of health care, hospitals perspective, with a look at emergency health care. then, house democratic leader steny hoyer hears from constituents at a health care town hall. that is at about 9:30 eastern. tamara, vice president by and gives an update on the economic

stimulus and the economy, live on c-span and c-span radio at about 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> i am really concerned that there are a lot of scare tactics going on on both sides, we are not getting a lot of the tree. it is hard to make a good decision or choose your side because of that. >> digit see the town hall, and what did you think of it? >> no, i did not. >> what do you think of your representatives from missouri and their opinion on the matter? >> i have been trying to keep up with what they are saying. it almost seems like we are leading -- leaning strongly toward reform, but i am not sure how good their reform will be for misery people. >> a i am from springfield, missouri, and i am totally against the health care system that we have today. we have to stop what we are doing right now. we cannot let this program go

through any farther. obama's way of thinking is not the way that the people of the united states are thinking. congress is not listening to us. we have to open our mouths and say it is time to stop and listen to the people. >> center mccaskill from missouri had a town hall recently. did you see it, and what response? >> i was not at the meeting, but i did see some of them on television. i thought she did a rather good job, but i did not know why she did not understand why the people were so vocal. we are vocal because it means so much to us. this is very important for the young people and our community, babies, old people, for everyone. we need health care, and good health care, not what is being proposed today. they must vote the way people want them to vote. that is why we elected them. >> i wish that president obama would give us real, true, universal health care. i wish he would look at the

french system, the british system, even canada. i have been to canada and france. i have been to britain, and i have seen that those people, they have good health insurance. >> the sea -- de dc center mccaskill town hall, and what did you think of it? >> i think it was necessary for everybody to have the right to speak what they want. we need health care, and we need the right kind of health care, not expensive, and not for people who are working to pick up everybody else's expenses. >> i think a health care could be a good thing here in america, if it was done in a certain way that would help the elderly and young, but give people freedom of choice that they want and the

freedom to go to their own doctor. >> what do you think about the town halls and how they have been going? >> they are not getting much accomplished, i think. they say it is a war out there. that is what i think. >> have you been to one yourself? >> no, i have not. >> my thoughts on the health care is, i realize there are a lot of people who need help with their insurance. on the other hand, i do not like the government trying to come in and give us something. i think it is to be a private industry. that is what america is all about. >> senator mccaskill had a town hall recently. did you see it, and our response? >> i did not see it, but i heard all about it. the people were outraged and upset. i heard it on the news. >> coming in october, c-span is

original documentary on the nation's highest court, part of supreme court week. here is some of what you will see. >> mr. g justice, and may it please the court, the government's concedes that the destruction of documents in anticipation of a proceeding is not a crime in the fall of 2001. >> something different is going on here than what goes on in the capitol building or in the white house. we need to appreciate how important it is to our system of government. >> this is the highest court in the land, and the framers created it after studying the great lawgivers in history and taking a look at what they thought worldwide was important for the judicial branch to do. >> i put in as much blood, sweat, and tears on the little cases as i do on the big ones.

we do not see here to make the law or decide who ought to win. we decide who wins under the law at the people have adopted. >> you would be surprised by a high level of collegiality here. >> if four of the nine of us want to hear any of these cases, we will hear it. >> we are here to decide things. the job is to decide. we decide. >> why is it that we have an elegant, astonishingly beautiful, impose a, impressive structure? it is to remind us that we have an important function, and to remind the public when it seized the building of the importance and the centrality of the law. >> i think the danger is that sometimes you come into a building like this and think it is all about you, or that you are important. that is something that i do not think works well with this job.

>> supreme court week, starting october 4 on c-span. >> in a few moments, we conclude this week's series of programs from the va hospital center in suburban washington, focusing on health care debate from the perspective of the hospital and its doctors. in an hour and a half, a health- care town hall meeting with house majority -- house majority leader and steny hoyer. after that, house speaker nancy pelosi says the house version of a health-care bill will include a public option. later, a justice department briefing on the latest -- largest medical fraud settlement in history. >> we will review the health care debate in congress toow