because our people participated in the innovation policy. and they're not participating just for participating. they're participating because they enjoy something, the result of that. that thing is the human rights. what i have to say to yap -- to you is that every country has a lot. our constitution is there. we have to respect our constitution. one other thing i have to say to you, the u.s. administration has been set up over 230 years.

from the very beginning, the human-rights were not like now. the black people had to enter a restaurant where they were not allowed. you move on and human rights issues have been modified and upgraded all the time until 1945. and u.s. women were for the first time allowed to vote. i may be wrong on that, but i think that is a fact. you just keep moving on. you can make change over time. until last year you a elected a new president'.

it was praised by the whole world. . . but from the beginning ofñi the administration of to this moment is a long process. . . >> people who have questions, especially easy ones which he likes -- but if i can ask one

short question to follow up on the last. there is, i believe, a human rights dialogue between the u.s. and vietnam. is there an upcoming session planned? >> it will be. we're having human-rights dialogue with australia, eu, norway, finland, and the u.s. it meets twice per year. the next one is coming. i think we have a good chance to exchange. a lot of good things have been done through that. >> thank you. colonel miller? >> i'm from the joint staff and i have the northeast asian division for j5, however, in a previous life i was one of the first defense attache is to hanoi.

i understand a little bits, but subsequent to that i was in china as an army attache in beijing. consistently the chinese say the toughest negotiators in the world are the vietnamese. that might be a testament to your negotiations. [laughter] one of the things i learned while there from my counterparts was a feeling from the vietnamese at that you yo never want to be beholden to a single security sponsor ever again. you mentioned just previous to this a little, what i meant. you were disappointed in the french, the chinese, and later while i was there with the russians.

and also with our security sponsor of the southern half of your country. the lesson i was told you learned was to always try to gain a multi-lateral listened in your security. my question is, as we are all looking for more secure and stable asia-pacific region, what is vietnam's's perspective on the framework that would best achieve that? in other words, what multi- lateral organizations or approach would best provide for everyone to achieve what we need in that very multi-culture

region of the world? >> i should have asked to and recognize that you were an attache in hanoi. you know much. let's see. for the security and stability of the region no [unintelligible] can do to maintain it. great efforts need to be produced from all country concerns or agency concerns, so i think our opposition is that everyone needs security and stability. everyone has to respect that. everyone has to restrain from using force, or threat of using

force. to take action harmful to the circumstance. we really want to have the collective mechanism to safeguard the regional security, but is not easy. for the security of vietnam we have to do it by ourself. we have the military pact with the soviet union in the 1980's.

yet the soviet union had [unintelligible] and it attorneys attacked our islands sh -- the chinese attacked our islands. the soviet union did not take any action. now if it is a military ally and military pack. we understand that because the soviet union at that time had to have a good relation with china as well. so what we told ourselves in the past and in the present, vietnam has to defend itself. we have to work and take care of our security. at the same time we need to have good cooperation with other partners.

so that it will help the economic development. we do not expect any assistance from foreign countries to defend our sovereignty and security. you have to do it. how to? you have to have a good maneuver. you're not going to have a nuclear weapon yet, so you have to think how to defend the country effectively. >> thank you. admiral? >> mr. ambassador, if i could skip back to china and follow on the answer you gave to colonel miller, i have heard a lot of criticism about the code of conduct of handling disputes in the south china sea and wonder if'from s perspective of that code of

conduct signed in 2002 -- how is it working? >> i was the one who worked on that. by that time i was the leader of the vietnam. we had a good negotiation on thatthey wanted to have a code of conduct. the chinese wanted to have doc. it is different terminology. the code of conduct is --

declaration of conduct which is different from the code of conduct. the code of conduct is more of a legal thing. the declaration is a formal thing. still now where working with china to move from a doc to coc. it is not easy. we have discussed a lot of issues. with doc i think together with the declaration from 1992 in manilla, the countries concerned

are more less restrained from threatening other people. naturally we respect, recognize the conflicts. they have been reduced a little bit. i cannot tell what will happen tomorrow because the chinese navy and air force are growing very fast. in the u.s. people do not know what china is up to. you can only tell the moving of the chinese ships. with submarines you cannot discover.

you do not know how many chinese submarines are in the south china sea. no one can tell what will happen next, but i think the doc helps a lot. concerned countries are respecting the spirit of this doc contract. no one wants the conflicts taking place there. >> would you talk about the para cells? >> we're talking with china about that. we have different positions with china on that. sometimes china says it is our territory. we say that is our territory.

we keep talking with china about this. historical lee, on the facts we are stuck there. we can prove strongly that it belonged to vietnam, but we are weaker in power. it happened in 1976. we keep talking with china about that place. that is our territory. >> we have time for one more question. >> mr. ambassador, with respect to the process the government is going through now to develop this too of economic development

plan over the next 10 years, the you think there is a constructive role the private sector can play to provide input in development of the plan and perhaps in partnering with the government to implement various aspects of it? >> the economic development strategy by 2020 will try to make vietnam be an industrialized economy. to achieve that goal is not simple. we have to have good management, political policy. we need to have a well-trained labor forces.

but i think our private sector in vietnam is growing up very fast. more and more they play important roles in the economic development. you can remember that the first private company officially started about 15 years ago. that is not a long time. but now it is booming. the private sector share is 44%. the foreign sector of foreign

and domestic ventures is about 50%. it is getting stronger, and we have to rely on the private sector for the development. and for the country's development. no more questions? >> what are the mechanisms for the private sector to help shape policy in vietnam? >> the first thing that the private sector helps is that the operation is a good one. once they operate successfully and progress the policy-making a circle has to take care of that. why and how.

that is the first thing the private-sector helps. secondly, we have the parliament of congress, the economic council, national council that the private sector takes part in. they can recommend the price or request a comment in any time in producing and implementing policy. >> thank you very much. you have been very generous with your time. it has been a fascinating conversation. i'm glad i was able to hear your marks and participate. please join me in thanking embassador le cong phung for spending the morning with us. it was a good dialogue.

>> coming up shortly here on c- span the u.s. house will gavel and at 12:30 p.m. eastern for general speeches. legislative work will get under way at 2:00 p.m. with eight bills under way. the senate will also meet at 2:00 p.m. today. senators will debate $122 billion for the transportation department. and also the housing department's next budget year. that will begin at 3:00 p.m. "the washington post" has a new website doing biographies on

government agencies. we will show a portion of that. host: we're joined for final 25 minutes by rachel von dongen. she is the editor of whorunsgov.com. what is behind the reason for the site? guest: it is the paper's website. there is a dearth of political biography out there. you have other sites that deal in the reference guide manner with other areas. we're looking to fill this niche. host: if people come to the website what is the main thing they're searching for? guest: is basically a reference site launched in january of this year. we have been quickly building the site with about 700 profiles. there are members of the obama

administration including cabinet secretaries and behind the scene people. we will have a political nominees, senate-confirmed people. there will also be lawmakers, governors, profiles of interest group leaders, lobbyists, and political strategist. host: who is using it? guest: last week we just began with moderated wiki. we keep you get deals with not only people but topics. it focuses on everything. we're looking for political users. we opened last week as a moderated wiki which means any member of the general public or policy maker in washington can enter the site and choose to add

or aidedit profiles. we only opened last week. any contributions or suggestions from the public will come into the editorial team at the post. we will review them before they are published. host: you can join us on the phone lines. we have discussed the word transparency quite a bit this morning. on the website who are some of the top searches people are looking at? guest: oftentimes it is the people behind the scenes. like reggie love, the personal secretary or personal aide it to barack obama. more commonly known as the famous do university basketball

player. another popular figure is the speech writer who has made about 20 speeches for the president. he has been drafting a major health care speech. host: for instance, on john the speechwriter, are you able to find out which particular speeches he has a hand in? guest: yes, we make an attempt to interview the subject. we have been able to get quite a few exclusive interviews with several of barack obama aids. host: good morning to larry, an independent caller. caller: good morning, these profiles on the website, how the you approach them? do they approach you? guest: so far it has been us

picking them. but now that we have an open the site to the general public we are asking you to nominate or add profiles. we hope to get ideas from the public and expert policy community here in washington. host: thanks for the call. last week the story about van jones changed. how did his profile change our website? guest: one of the nice things as we had him up before anyone knew much about him. we have not yet opened the side as the moderated wiki by the time he resigned, but through the team we had updated continuously as the news broke. host: you're the editor. how big is the team?

guest: there are three other reporters and one blogger. host: what is that all about? guest: it is basically just his take on politics. it is quite popular. host: you have only three reporters but you are a washington post publication, said the benefit from other reporting? guest: we do draw on those stories, link widely on the web, and have had some washington post reporters write some of our profiles. as with the ted kennedy profile. host: good morning, lynchburg, va., a caller on the line for democrats. please mute your television. caller: i want to give my opinion on the way the democrats run.

i don't think we have the government anymore. the elderly, we're getting shoved into the corner. they do not want to give you help with the cost of living. i do not believe the government is doing a proper thing as it used to. the need to be things brought up about this that are not being brought up. you hear about hospital care and this and that. host: things for the comment. would you have, was it in the planning a matter who won the election? guest: yes, it was. we tried to seed the site with lawmakers who would have been in congress regardless. we have something called a

reform tracker and are asking the general public to update the positions of their lawmakers or others on health care. we are telling them to find work congress stands in general. host: how you verify? is a part of the moderated wiki? guest: it is indeed. we ask people to go to local newspaper articles, or cite things in some way like that. we can. verify and then publish. host: so, it is a 24- 24-- things change constantly? guest: yes, that is the hope. with participation from the committee we hope to keep up with the ever-changing news. host: louisiana, good morning to steve.

caller: yes, sir, it seems to me that the newspaper is running whorunsgov.com is no different iscbs, abc, or nbc. it is itpravda from russia. it was six months before van jones had any trouble. then the day that he resigned cnn gave him credit for creating two million jobs. i don't understand the difference between pravda and mainstream media, and the czars and politureau. guest: van jones was on the website since january. this is detailed biographical

information about him. it is way before he came to light on either cable tv or on the internet. as we review the most popular profiles on the site i change the home page every day. we try to update as news warrants. we were aware about mr. jones for a while and were one of the only reliable sources are places for news about him. host: this is wichita falls, texas, on the republican line. are you on the air? go ahead, please. i tell you what. i will put you on hold and please turn down your tv. we will go to akron, next. caller: i was wondering if you lose people like the trilateral

commission? they seem to have a big influence. guest: yes, we do not actually have those at the moment, but intend to include members outside the government such as heads of think tanks and interest groups. we are expanding. we >> you can see "washington journal" every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. we will go live to the house now. . .

supreme court week, with and such from historians and the justices beginning october 4. go online now for a virtual tour of the court. historic photos and more c- span.org act/supremecourt. president >> obama has said the will not be another government bailout of boston. on this the first anniversary of the lehman brothers collapse the president went to wall street to press for a speech for financial changes that he says will prevent another crisis. this morning "washington

journal" talked with the trading commissioner for about a half- hour. year anniversary of the fall of lehman brothers. the president having to wall street to talk to folks, mainly about the regulation of financial markets. . guest: we learned a great deal from this crisis. we learned we have to cover the gaps in the system like the over-the-counter derivatives. these other complex contracts that transfer risk. we need stronger rules to protect the consumer. the president has a bold plan to address that, particularly mortgage products. while it is beyond will we do at the cftc, we need to have a way to unwind these institutions so we're not faced in that terrible decision as win lehman failed. it was not easy for decision- makers to do what they needed

to, to resolve the situation. host: what does the cftc oversee? guest: it and its predecessors were set up by president roosevelt to oversee the securities market. the sec was set up. the separate regulator for corn and wheat, the commodities, but since then derivative contracts for futures for all sorts of products like financial futures -- many are familiar with the s&p futures and we oversee those. that and for oil and metals as well. host: today in the paper one year after lehman's fault -- its collapse sent shock waves to the economy. small and mid-sized companies could suddenly not make peril. many rely on large banks to issue short-term commercial paper. pply short-term comm

how did the collapsed last year change what you do at the cftc? guest: i only came on board in may and was honored to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. we're now working with congress to push a broad reform agenda. to push a broad reform agenda. particular the administration sent a very strong package and we're working with congress to get it enacted. host: what kind of reception is a getting on capitol hill? guest: good reception. it will get a healthy debate and some pushback from wall street itself, but there is a broad consensus that we must do this. host: we invite viewers to join

the conversation. the lead editorial this morning from ""the new york times" is about forming the financial times. it covers areas like consumer protection, systemic risk regulation, and derivatives. the multi-trillion dollar in three this was a major catalyst of the crisis. they are supposed to help investors and businesses manage risk, but after a 2000 law deregulated then they became a tool for speculation. they also right that the administration's proposal would exempt some derivative investors and like many hedge funds from requirements to trade standardized contracts on exchange.

they increased that the point was made in a recent letter you wrote to letters -- they write that. guest: i think the agencies should regulate all these derivatives. the plan sent to the hill was very strong. we want to make sure all derivatives are covered and of a standardized products do get the transparency of central exchanges. host: is there risk is still out there in the derivative market one year since lehman's? guest: yes, definitely. these large financial institutions have gotten even more concentrated in the last year. they're not regulated for transparency. they are not reporting their trades to any central regulator or to the public. the public benefits from transparency and benefits if we

lower risk by having specific capital and margin requirements on them. this is all in the administration's program with congress. host: the president has a lot to get done with healthcare and energy as well. how quickly do you think he can get something passed congress? guest: the president will speak to wall street today. he sees its importance. i leave it to congress to time these different reforms. host: good morning, houston, on the independent line. caller: thank you. i purchased fannie mae and freddie mac bonds which were collateralized mortgage obligations. when the crisis started i didn't detail the investigation -- i did a detailed investigation of what i owned.

i am an attorney. the homes that were the collateral, there was no description of them. there was no recording of the securitized interests in those towns in the property records. this is accounting 101, banking 101 and law school 101. if there is a bond collateralized, then there must be in the till district action -- description that must be updated on an annual basis. they threw those rules out the window. if there is a security interest in real estate, that must be recorded in the real property records. they threw that out the window. this is what they call a toxic assets, but it really is fraudulent paper. there are no homes. the same or collateralized over and over.

this is a massive fraud. guest: marylou, you have highlighted one of the things we have learned. the sale of mortgage products often preyed upon many consumers who do not understand them. we need to reform that an need strong consumer protection laws. secondly, wall street in underwriting this product lower standards greatly. bank regulators need to enhance those rules. host: minnesota, good morning to bob on the line for democrats. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is, if you are seeing many parallels between the enron debacle and what

happened with the housing market? arthur andersen should have been, should have had people who were responsible, but because of the regulation aiding and abetting, that law was repealed. it would have made someone legally liable who work for arthur andersen. my comment is, in 1999 senator phil graham of texas was responsible for a bill that deregulated the housing market so that the investment and commercial banks could merge. the same kind of high-risk, high-yield mentality spilled over into the housing market. your comment? guest: bob, i do think there are

certain parallels. enron was outside the regulatory regime and at the time one of the largest companies in the country leading to the largest bankruptcy. aig had no real effect of federal regulation. you and i both had our money in there. we must regulate the over-the- counter derivatives marketplace. i believe there will be consensus with congress willing to do that. host: good morning to frank on the republican line. listen, you just said that a.i.g. had no effective regulation. they are the largest insurance company on the planet and they do not have honest people in a regulatory agency doing their job?

they're out doing s doing swap contracts? the problem is there's no one with decency or honesty to tell people the truth. you know what the truth is, so does alan greenspan and ben bernanke and larry summers, so does a timothy geithner. you are all from the same place. it is obvious that no one is telling anyone the truth. credit default swap contracts that absorb the counterparties from these downside risks from their reckless gambling? guest: frank, all the people you mentioned are very good and honest people. the problem was at a.i.g. that it was regulated at an insurance company at the state level and at the federal level there affiliate's were not all covered. it was about $450 billion of

these credit default swaps, but the laws, the federal once did not give them any tools, these nice people to regulate the business. host: jonathan has a column on the real cause of the crash. he writes here at the sub-head, that the main question is not have to strengthen conditional banking, but how to stabilize our shutter banking. -- shadow banking.

if that is the case, is her regulation proposing to address some of these issues? guest: it this and that is well said. i fully support the idea to bring under regulation. anyone who deals in it must be regulated. low-risk through capital margin and increased transparency through reporting. the standard product must also be on what is called central clearing. so that the public can see moment to moment with these transactions trade. we do not have any of that right now. it is a very large shift if we are successful with congress. host: here is florida, an independent caller. caller: you good morning, i have a question, please.

i want to know concern in the glass-stegall act, if it could be enacted again with whatever improvements need to be added or deleted to make that functioning. host: what did that act do? guest: it was passed in the early 1930's and separated investment banking from commercial banking. commercial been making loans and investments selling bonds or stock to the public. over many decades investment banking and commercial banking came back together. chris, to your point, what is important now is to protect the financial system of the 21st century so we do not have this feeling again. the regulatory and financial system failed the american

public in the 21st century. that is why we must revise laws. revisions to they are probably very different from those 70 years ago. host: in the absence of regulations until the congress passes them, what is your agency doing to bolster regulations? guest: the commodity futures trading commission is doing a number of things. we're able to put out on a weekly basis better information about index investing and hedge fund investing in the futures markets. we do not have to reach into the over-the-counter derivatives, although we want to. we are taking a close look at whether to reinstate position limits in the trading and oil and energy markets. we once did. we now do it in the agriculture market. are the financial actors are so

large that concentrated positions could destroy markets? host: are will the clinton markets waiting on us? host: guestguest: we're workinge both in europe and in asia. we have had success with those in london. in london. host: we@@@@@@ issues that is important to me that seems to be being ignored. you mentioned energy and agriculture as two areas you are focused on, particularly on the long side so people cannot run their prices up. i am concern about the metals

markets, particularly the precious metals markets, specifically with concentrations on the short side. currently, today, we have roughly 29 million ounces short in gold, concentrated mainly in four bully on the banks. major players hsbc and j.p. morgan are short more than one-quarter of the world's annual gold production. host: let me in an e-mail missing topic. -- on the same topic, let me tie in this e-mail. what can you tell us about this? guest: at the agency we're looking at whether to set a position limit for commodities of finite supply.

congress gave us that authority and directed us to use it back in the 1930's. we did it for metals and energy products through the 1990's in partnership with the exchanges. while that was backed away from in 2001 will looking first at the energy project. there have been many questions also raised about the precious metals markets. host: what is the danger of that in terms of people's positions in precious metals or other commodities? guest: there are two sides of the debate which resulted. we want to promote markets. the cftc does not set prices. we make sure that markets are free of fraud and manipulation. that hedgers can naturally mead

speculators on the other side. the farmer need someone on the other side to take that risk. they need to add a place that is fair and orderly and no one party has such a significant size that the concentrated position might overwhelm the market. host: here is a call on the republican line from tampa, fla. caller: over the past 20 years i did attention to something told to me about a former irs agent about our economy. do you believe we can do anything in our country without changing the tax system? it has become regresses instead of progressively. it allows these different exchanges. enron and all those people, arthur andersen had the

accounting responsibility. they told them where to put it billions. two weeks later the largest accounting firm in the u.s. this appeared. if you look at the problems in healthcare is the tax system. they have been talking about it for 40 years to simplify its. it is up to 67,000 pages. both sides will not talk about it. guest: merrill, i run an agency that is a regulatory one. i don't know if bill wants to answer your tax question, but i leave that to my colleagues over at the treasury department and white house. i would mostly focus on reforming the financial system which i think we must do. if we do not, then more taxpayer money will go out. you and i both put money into aig.

i think the most important thing we can do now to protect taxpayers is to reform our financial oversight. host: what you think the legacy will be of september 2008? guest: i hope is that we make reforms and protect consumers better, but certainly there will be steady for decades about what happened. -- there will be studies for decades. we were saving so little at the time. we were trying to get the economy right in the federal budget and account deficit. host: you are speaking at a conference this week looking at events from one year ago. what is the focus? guest: mostly on the over-the- counter derivatives and reform. i take every opportunity to

promote that. host: about 10 more minutes gary gensler. richmond, good morning. caller: a few minutes ago a gentleman called then talking about ben bernanke, timothy geithner's, larry summers and telling the american people the truth. your guest responded to say they were very honest people. i want to direct the audience to an article in the nation magazine put out in november 2008. it is a very liberal publication. it was a scathing criticism of larry summers in particular. this was on him. i was astounded. it went back to the 1980's and 1990's. the premise was that they did not want him appointed and treasury secretary. they were trying to prevent obama's administration from naming him as treasury secretary. they did a very investigative

piece on him. in the 1990's and his exploits in lithuania when he was there for two years. host: mary, this was in "the nation" a magazine? caller: yes, november 2008. guest: i want to say that i think very highly of larry summers and worked closely with him and the late 1990's and today. these are challenging issues. we need to bring reform. to the earlier caller what i was addressing was that aig's downfall was really largely about an effective federal regulation. the laws were not there to cover these cds's. we need these agencies to have

greater authority. host: here is the front page of the orange county register in california. it is one year all. it is specifically about the real-estate market in california. what sort of signs does the cftc keep its eye out for in potential trouble for markets? guest: we have a market surveillance group. on a daily basis we look at transactions to guard against manipulation and fraud in the sale of the markets. unfortunately, we were shrunk in the last 10 years. we are a small agency, fewer than 600 people. we shrunk over 20% from 1999 until 2008. today we have more tips and leads on fraud cases and

manipulation then we have staff to investigate. host: last week the head of the sec staff testified about the inspector general's report on how they missed the bernard madoff ponzi scheme. that must raise concerns on whether you are able to catch all the nefarious characters? guest: it does, partly because of limited staff. we also went in the last 10 years from markets with an open outcry, images of people in the chicago pits screaming at each other -- that is now all a lectern. we need to update electronic surveillance and spend money to have the 21st century systems. -- that is now all electronic. caller: good morning, in the trader.

if you would only let me talk about hank paulson for second. before this happened he was the head of goldman sachs. he retired. he would become the secretary only if he has a lot of power, so they accept him. he lets bear stearns go. lehman brothers was let go. he saves aig which has about $120 billion of the credit default swaps insured by lehman. then the hedge funds go after him. the get him down to $47. he runs and stops and short selling of the banks and savings goldman sachs. then we find out that he had preferred shares -- $50 million in preferred shares he should buy and we only got $25 billion.

is there anything he thinks hank paulson should be investigated for? he knows what i'm talking about to. -- talking about. guest: we lived through very challenging time. the financial system and the american economy was on an edge last fall. it was a difficult time that congress and the then- administration came together on. we ought to take those lessons and make sure we put into place sound financial reform. part of that is a transparent way that when institutions are in trouble they get resolved. there was no good decision making that could have been had last year for non-banks like a.i.g. or lehman brothers.

working with congress it is important to make sure that the federal deposit insurance corp. and treasury have a way to unwind these institutions. host: rodriquez gary gensler has his m.b.a. from the wharton business school at the university of pennsylvania. you spend time at goldman sachs and also on senator sarbain'ne's staff on the banking committee. what do you think? guest: the american public needs to be assured that there are no conflicts. i left a wall street 12 years ago. it still comes up. people want to make sure whether in my job or anyone else's that we're working on behalf of the american public. that is valid. host: how on your staff do you

make sure? people who have had both policy and wall street experience? guest: one, may sure they comply with everything the government office of ethics layout. obama also has a strong set of ethics laid out. we need a strong balance. some expertise from the hill and some from academia, from main street, and on occasion even from wall street. host: good morning charles, on the republican line. caller: michael relates to the past two years of predatory devaluation and untitled transfer of these foreclosed mortgage notes on the courthouse steps. i'm an expert. i set up systems that are now

checkable through different programs. any american can find the real any american can find the real estate value of his home as an the wall street people, through securitization, have taken a different method of valuing the toxic assets, which is a security which is totally different than the home value. home values last week in san diego, there was an unnecessarily $135,000 per property. why does this happen or how does this happen? a credit defaults what takes place and of the new owners transferred in place of the foreclosed person at the courthouse. that new owner is the beneficiary of a credit defaults swap, and they pay off party a, and the party goes away free. party b, the investor who never

held the titles on the party, is now on the record. this is massive. it is fraud. you're part of the set up in the year 1999 and 2000 under the commodities future modernization that. host: we can get a response. guest: i do believe we need to bring broad reform to the markets and a particularly to the derivatives markets. credit defaults swaps, which were blip on the radar screen in 1999 or 2000, grew significantly. they need to be regulated, particularly against fraud and manipulation. the use of credit defaults swaps can lower risks, but they can also aggravate things as they did with aig. host: michigan is our last caller. it is an independent scholar. >caller: good morning.

i watched for several hours with officials from moody's and standard and poor's said in front of a congressional committee, and the police said that they gave high ratings to those instruments and after they were sold, they should have originally been c, but they give them day and aa ratings. i feel that there's no punishment for these people that transgress. there will be no lessons learned. i find it quite disgusting. yes, we made a mistake. we will correct it. also, about which i believe is the shorts -- where people did not even own a stock and were able to purchase it and sell it. it is so crazy that even i, who

invests in the stock market marginally, cannot follow this massive fraud. guest: securities and exchange commission, another regulatory commission led by chairman shapiro is looking a both of those. we do need to enhance our over said of the rating agencies and of the sec is taking strong steps that way. and also addressing itself to the short selling issue. again, i think we have so many areas of financial reform we must address, some working with congress. we have to ensure a result of the derivatives marketplace, some within our own jurisdiction. jurisdiction. the cftc is looking at position limits. as you mentioned on the ratings agencies and short-selling, the cftc has already been looking closely at ratings agencies. host:

>> the u.s. house meets at 2 p.m. eastern to the big eight bills, one dealing with teaching the u.s. constitution. we will have live coverage here on c-span. on c-span2, the senate will start with the general speeches before returning to debate on a 120 two billion dollars next budget year for the transportation and housing department. and on c-span3, a senate hearing gets underway on household funds affect public health. that will be live also. >> a new york democrat talks about how he uses technology and social needed to keep his constituents and to bid on congressional issues. that is denied on c-span2 -- that is tonight on c-span2.

>> a week ago, of van jones resigned as the green czar. this morning, open "washington journal" looked at the role of white house czars in the obama administration. journal" continues. its coat neil king -- host: neil king had an article. guest: the first term used in this sort of setting was back under fdr when curt had to this -- when cartoonists use it to lampoon at the time. it is a moniker of someone who is overseeing the policy areas at the time. poverty is ouczar, inflation cz.

it has really gotten carried away. host: "some republicans, fanned by conservative commentators, warned that these commentators right of a shadow government pickup y have. guest: at the moment there is an existing list of 32 advisers, a list that glenn beck has posted on his web site -- for instance, a lot of senators that i have talked to have cited this list. at the moment, if you take just the so-called czars on the lesson that existed in previous administrations, where talk of the faith-based, intelligence, the drug czar. if you take that list, the convoys, -- the invenvoys --

pick somebody overseas that will have a lot of stature in the region. if you take those couple have four. if you then take the people that are without any debate confirmed career government officials, who are actually serving in some cases in congressionally approved tasks, the stimulus accountabilities are, earl detainee, that was -- a host: and he had to be approved by congress, correct? guest: i think he was uprooted -- appointed under bush. you go through that, that is actually about 11 people. then there is -- this may be

debatable, but there is kind of what i would call the short-term economic crisis people that have been appointed to meet immediate things that will probably not exist a year or two from now. this would be the manufacturing so-called czar, ron bloom, also working on the car bailout. where the auto recovery czar. economic czar paul volcker is almost never intel. that leaves us with seven people that do not apply -- is almost never in town. the domestic violence czar. then we get the ones that are significant, carol browner, handling energy and climate change issues in the white house. the health czar, also working in the white house. the urban affairs czar.

the one causing the biggest stink was vaqn jones. stink was vaqn jones. i doubt whether he would ever on had better understood his past. host: so you think if he had to face congressional scrutiny, he would not have made it? caller: i think he probably would have pulled himself out -- host: are these numbers radically different from these types of positions, say, in the bush administration? guest: there are differences. part of it is the fact that obama came in so aggressively, and it was one of the things that people are now a restaurant -- reacting to. we are going to push for climate change, therefore we need a climate change adviser.

on the foreign-policy front, we're going to try to jump into all these things, so i am going to have four big envoys right off the bat, when most presence would have picked them as their administration went on and a particular need arises. a lot of this is the immediacy of the whole thing. host: there is one czar that is pretty well known throughout all administrations, and that is the drug czar. guest: that office has existed for a long time. the monitor -- a moniker goes back, a congressionally approved office under reagan. william bennett was one of the best drug czars. if you go back 10 or 20 years, the czar moniker has been used more often. host: the moniker has been used

by both parties? guest: is not official. it is used in the media. the whole terminology went back, if you think of times when the president had to deal with a whole bunch of things, picking people willy-nilly to oversee things during the depression, and fdr's response to that, so he had what people called the war production czar or the transportation czar. host: duties positions -- and do these positions, is it adding an extra layer of government, say, between -- that was going to be -- well, tom daschle was going to be the health and human services secretary, and now you principally have two people looking after health care policy, nancy and apollo and kathleen sebelius. guest: is arguable that if john

-- tom daschle had become that, it is possible they would not have had such a position in the white house. kathleen sebelius come on the other hand, i think they saw the need to marshal support congressionally, which is not the kind of job the hhs secretary would do. host: going back to fdr, accompanying neil king's arbuckle, this is sergeant shriver, eunice shriver's has been. what was he called? guest: under johnson in 1964, there was an earthquake in alaska that was devastated. he picked a person to oversee the effort. he was called the alaska reconstruction czar, similar to somebody that bush picked after katrina. host: the morning to leon, on our republican line.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to speak to the issue of the people in place as czars. it seems to me that everything this obama administration has done has been planned on purpose way ahead of time in. even though there is no pressure of the site, if they had announced prior to his administration coming into office, we the people would have had a chance to look into these people and to see their background and to see what their foundation is and what they believe in. i think that would have been much better, a much better way of having people placed into our government that have no congressional oversight. what do you guys think? guest: echoes to the issue of transparency, which is one of the things that has concerned --

it goes to the issue of transparency, which is one of the things that has concerned people in congress. i mean, one of the other problems that is really going on here, which is really putting a little bit of land on the senate, is that the confirmation process itself has become so slow that at the moment i think it is less than half of the people that obama has put forward. host: why has it gotten so slow? guest: ees just got more gummed -- it has just got more bummed out over the years. the financial disclosure and process had become so involved. it has kept people away from preferring the more kind of advisory council a positions because you do not have to go -- he has kept people away from those positions and preferring the more credit advisory council positions because you do not have to go through that. in some ways, in this case, it

is being encapsulated in this whole fear about the czars, which i think is in large part overblown, but on the other hand i think there is an increased number of these advisers in this administration, and some concern in the senate about their muscle over this is legitimate. host: let's hear from greensboro, north carolina. ann, go ahead. ann, go ahead. caller: i was so glad caller: i was so glad to hear this make that point of the latest appointments. the republicans are holding up several of the president's nominees. most recently, hillary clinton voiced concern because some of her staff have not been approved. that is one way that republicans have held up to nominees. -- have held up his nominees.

the other thing i wanted to say is regarding c-span. i just noticed recently that c- span has really started bringing in and discussing things like fox news. but the last couple of days, everybody on has been repeating the same thing that we hear from fox news. i think useless surprised that c-span -- before, it seemed much more balanced and would give you a balanced view of what is going on, but i noticed that yesterday in particular. it seems like today is starting out with the same thing. i think it is very important that the audience share both sides of this. host: 1 for your input. guest: you know, it is not just republicans making life miserable for the sitting president. he it happened at the time of

9/11. there were a lot of positions led bush did not have in place. i read this story by a scholar who covers this stuff, and you talked about how he thinks it will be well into 2010 before the vast majority or perhaps all the positions that obama need to feel through senate confirmation will be filled. host: kay bailey hutchison complaints in "the washington times -- in "the washinton post" that these folks do not get vetted. she writes "tsarist washington," "i oversleep legislation and agencies that cover policy areas -- i oversee legislation and agencies to cover policy areas, trade technology, transit, consumer protection, and commercial regulation. neither i nor the committee chairmen have clear authority to compel these stars to appear

before the panel and report what they are doing. the obama administration presented only two of these officials for our consideration before they assume their duties. we have had no opportunity to probe the others credentials." guest: i would be interested to know the 10 of the 32. you know, it is interesting. if you take someone like ron bloom, being called the car czar, a very small office responsible for the gm-chrysler matter, he has gone before congress many times. i am wondering if this -- in this case of senator hutchison has tried to some of these people to these hearings. if this was an issue, i think would be worthwhile to try to force it. host: can congress almost force

everyone or put a summons for people to testify before them? guest: they can. they cannot immediately call up obama's national security adviser. they cannot call any member of the white house staff just automatically to go testify, that there are precedents for doing that, if they are interested in doing it. they should push for it. there is talk of them doing that. host: on our independent line, john from out of when, illinois. caller: i was wondering if mr. king knows about the size of a book that he co-authored, i believe it was in the 1970's, -- or, i am sorry, i am not sure of the date the book was written. but the information out there is that this guy has supposedly written that he believes a human being does not become a human being until the age of two.

he also has advocated abortion up to the age of two. also, one. quick about the health care thing in the gop. all right, the gop has brought up 800 amendments to the health care bill, and not one has passed. no one. so do not give me the bipartisan line on the democrat side when, you know that, there have been amendments on the other side but not -- none of them have been passed. host: back to the comments about john coltrane. -- john holdren. guest: there is a huge tracker of people who have said various things, and people have made a lot out of it.

one is widely regarded as being the most prolific and the most cited legal scholar in the country. he is also a kind of a provocateur and loves to wade into every kind of interesting legal issue, so he has taken a lot of positions to push forward various arguments, not necessarily thinking he was going to institute them as policy, but basically as a legal scholar. i did not know that holdedsren d discuss legal issues, but i always thought of him as the science commentator. host: "conservatives took shots at holdren for environmental textbooks that he wrote. the authors mention involuntary britain would vefertility contrg

sterilants into drinking water or staple foods. that to the office of management and budget role. what does that position mean? guest: that is interesting position. the office of information and regulatory affairs, or something like that. it was created under ronald reagan as an anti -- hot onerous ones and ones that are going to damage are not get through in and become regulation. there is because the back and forth through all administrations whether or not it is intuitively -- intrinsically a anti-regulatory position. to call him a czar, i think we have called that position a czar, but again, it is a short time thing -- is a shorthand

think, not some nefarious thing. host: next caller. caller: thank you for c-span3 i do not understand why congress is lying down on -- i think you for c-span. i do not read as to why congress of lying down on this. how can they allow this to go on when they have no oversight? i thought the secretaries of the cabinet and the undersecretaries would handle this type of activity because they do have some oversight committee congress does, all these people. why has this congress laid down on their authority? it seems to be usurping the separation of powers with this czar structure. guest: i would challenge the idea that there is a czar structure. if you take those people, i mean, the money involved is not necessarily that large. if congress wants to really shed

some light on these particular positions, i think it certainly has the right and the authority and the muscle to do that. so far it has been a lot of smoke and not much else, but maybe they will see in the next few weeks that they will try to push forward on this. i question whether the authority is -- congress has a lot of authority on these things. host: if these the czars are in the executive branch, they are subject to purview by congress, are they not? guest: if obama has picked someone to be an advisor and that person makes 100th of his cousin dollars -- and that person is $150,000, it would probably be more difficult host: greg in washington, d.c., good morning. you are on the air. caller: good morning.

i just wanted to make a clarification because you said glenn beck says there are 23, but when your guest was talking, you said, well, not all 23 are congressionally approved, that it only ends up being around, i do not know, less than 10, 11? so bush had eight, he has 11? and these people calling to say he has a plan -- how do you plan something like that? he sounds a little bit crazy, and i think people jump the gun and they do not listen. host: is there any indication the obama administration came in looking to use more of these offices, these sorts of the czars or whatever you want to talk about. guest: during the transition, obama started anointing people even before -- appointing people before taking office. this person is going to move forward on this issue, tom

daschle's name was already out there. one of the for stories in december about, he is going to go the direction of peaking advisers for some of these things. i think it is a stylistic thing where he has decided that he once -wants his trusted guy in e white house to push forward on a legislative matter. i think the one people -- the one thing people are misconstruing is that under carol browner there are 20 people for this new office on climate change issues and there is a new kind of bureaucracy created. for the most part, these people are on their own with a staff member or something. this is the kind of thing that can sprout up and disappear fairly quickly. it is interesting, but go ahead. host: no, no coming you finish

your comment. guest: paul light says here in his piece in "the new york times," "sarsgaard are really the giants of a difference. they hardly ever restraint -- czars are really the giants of the administration picked up soon the guy's not in on the back door of the president and say, mr. president, what about me? host: here is georgia, richard, it independent kollek. caller: good morning, bill. good morning, mr. king. yes, then jones -- van jones became a communist. he stepped down and resigned.

however, we have another one that is probably just as scary as head, and his name is mark foley, the director -- mark lloyd. he praised hugo chavez when hugo chavez was taking control of the media in venezuela. he criticized the united states for trying to intervene and keep the press free over there. now i think his position is basically shut down free-speech, talk radio, and to deny the people. host: we just have a couple of minutes here, richard, and we will get a response from neil king. guest: that has been a big issue played out on talk radio. i do not know a lot about mark lloyd's biography, but he is a low level at the fcc, the chief diversity offer or something like that -- the chief diversity

office or something like that. he is not a person in any kind of great authority. there is talk along these lines that this has percolated at various times on capitol hill, but i do not know if there is any indication that the administration is going to go down this track. the things that he said about van jones are more or less true. to go back to the vetting thing, that is how he got host: back to the confirmation process. in your words, you said they were gummed up. is it worse than in the past? guest: people are making the argument that it is getting worse, getting slower in the efforts to reform it. it is not necessarily like more acrimony than there was a years ago. host: so it is not worse -- your

mind guest: i think it has been bad for a long time. it has been that eight years it has been that eight years ago, probably worse host: san diego, good morning. caller: i find your program interesting today, for sure. there is the issue of vetting people. it seems to me that these individuals have been around long enough to learn what it's going on with the system and how it works, how taxpayers' money is funneled here and there. a lot of individuals that of being picked seems to me that there is not any w for the public to get ahead of the curbs and get out there and say something about these people and have the media picked it up and get busy investigating these

individuals. host: we will get a response. guest: well, there are various ways like this way. there has been a huge amount of posts -- attention paid to this issue. the blogosphere has been lit up over it. they're more ways of getting it now than there were 10 years ago. that may be one of the reasons of the whole thing is way more of an issue than it has ever been before. the use of these kinds of advisers in various capacities is not new. maybe the magnitude is 15%, 20% more now than it was under the bush and ministration. it is not as if it is a totally new phenomenon. host: thank you for being with us. >> and more on the one-year anniversary of the biggest bankruptcy in u.s. history. we will ship as much as we can. the house meets in about 10 minutes.

host: chekhov insisted the big business editor for the associated press. there meltdown legacy is a five week series which many c-span viewers and readers of are familiar with. thank you for joining us this morning. thank you for joining us. in a year since the financial meltdown, what is marked as the beginning of the meltdown, this is a five-week series said the associated press put together. when did you start working on this? >> ever since last fall, we knew that something is up was going to be important. it 1-year anniversary is a logical place to start. the thought process of looking at the five weeks after the decision to take over fannie and

freddie mac. when we were at the peak of the crisis with the stock market falling for eight days, we thought that was a pretty good time to look at what was happening, where we were going. host: we want to invite the viewers into the conversation. democrats, 202-737-0002. republicans, 202-737-0001 independents, 202-628-0205. tell us what it had been like for you, in terms of the year since the financial crisis. what has changed for you? your report goes into many aspects of the economy. let's start with the auto the economeconomy. you write --

how has it chang particularly for chrysler and gm, the credit crisis came at a worse time. they were losing money. they had an inability to raise fresh money, and that is what brought the financial side of the house to a head, and what they had to go to the government. the trends that that story identifies was going on at that time. last summer we had for dollar gasoline and that made people rethink, do i need an s.u.v.? they were like almost all companies. if you look at the current market prices, if you want to

put in the definition of a meltdown, that is what it was. companies could not raise money, banks were not willing to lend money, everyone was scared. host: in terms of auto sales, the no. you report most it 10 million annual expected sales. how will future sales be affected by less demand for automobiles, consumers hanging onto their cars for lumber? guest: -- longer? guest: they are, and part of the reason is it is much harder to get a car loan amount. basically, you had to put down more money. there was a time where you could come into the door and sign a piece of paper, and you could drive away. that is no longer a given. host: if you have to sum up what

you have learned in these series of articles, the aspects of where the economy is now, one year later, what would you say? what have people you spoke to said about where the economy will be one year from now? guest: there will always be a recovery. i do not know if we can say is right now, six months from now, but that is coming. it is pretty apparent the economy is getting better. typically, when you come out of recession, you see much more pronounced increase in consumer spending. they call it pent-up demand. this time, we think it will be perhaps less-pronounced, particularly after the bad

recession of 1982. it is all about demographics. this recession have been at the worst time for baby boomers. some of them are retiring, or retired already. some are about to retire and they saw their pension plans, their retirement savings getting decimated. we believe that will have a pronounced effect on consumer spending. if you look at car sales, in the bubble years, we were up to 17 million sales per year. right now we are around 10 million. are we going to get back to 17 million? probably not. host: our guest is the associate editor of the associated press. first call on the independent line. mike in florida. caller: back in march, on cnn,

they've released statistics chumming that 49% of the population was receiving most of the goods under president bush and 1% of the population was receiving 10%. those in the top 10% received the income growth. lower and middle class essentially dropped. in my mind, and the economy should be fed from the bottom up. therefore, in my view, the reason we went into recession was because people who normally spend the money did not have the money. people who had the money were trying to put more money into the stock market. i only heard that once, and i have never heard it again.

i am curious why? guest: i would disagree. it is well known income disparity grew within those years. we have reported on it. it is a fairly pronounced affect. what happened as the recession hit -- this is when you went from a garden variety recession into a great recession. everyone stopped spending. arguably, there were people who did not need to have credit, but they were not spending either. when you think about one year ago, going into christmas, retailers were wringing their hands about who was going to buy. host: you referred to this as the great recession. is that what history will call this?

guest: we think so. this is the deepest recession since the great depression. we have not hit bottom in the unemployment rate. some experts believe it could exceed 10%. if you look at that progression of the decline in the unemployment rate, it is pretty scary. the slope is all lot deeper, and faster, and that begs the question, how long before it turned up? is it going to be a be-shaped recovery -- v-shake her recovery as you often see, or will it be more like a u? host: next phone call. caller: i noticed your clip on obama talking about health care on "16 minutes." all he said was i think we should do this, i think we

should do that. i think we need to do this. this is the most unqualified president -- host: jeremy, we are focusing on the financial meltdown. do you have a question about that? caller: what are barack obama's qualifications for knowing anything about the economic history of america? where has he been schooled in economics? host: chuck hawkins has been reporting on this. what have you learned about the administration's efforts across the board, in terms of the scope of our primary efforts on behalf of the federal government? guest: it has been unprecedented, that is for sure. when you think about the bush administration, but secretary paulson did, remember, he ran

goldman sachs. in 2007, he was talking about making government less interested in the markets. you heard the same thing from alan greenspan. they had to kind of wing it. as things got worse, the fed, treasury, and administration took unprecedented steps, and that followed through when president obama took office and made tim geithner his secretary. the steps they have taken are unprecedented. host: 15 more minutes with the deputy editor of the associated press and their five-week series. democrats, 202-737-0002. republicans, 202-737-0001.

look here in the "financial times" -- here is drawn from seattle. democrat line. caller: i unemployed union carpenter. i have been on unemployment for 10 months. item on an extension right now. all along the coast, may be about 10,000 people who are out of work in our trade. all these businesses say that there will not be workforce six months, a couple of years. so when we start defaulting our

loans, the ones being carried by stimulus, what will happen then? are they going to open up food lines? host: are you close to defaulting on your home? caller: right now i am pretty good. but if things do not work out, i may not have enough to pay moneandrent and i could default. guest: he has hit on some of the key question here. jobless benefits only last for a certain amount of time. congress passed an extension that gave the unemployed workers additional money. you have to ask a question, though, will there be pressure on congress to extend the extension? we have not hit the bottom in

unemployment. that is a lagging indicator companies do not typically higher until it is very clear to them that they have a sustainable increase. you are right, there are a lot of people on the process right now. i am not in washington. i used to be. these are the kinds of issues that people need to be hearing from their constituents. i would not be surprised if something happened on that. host: here is a headline this morning on executive pay -- host: our independent line. caller: good morning.

i have a question. in the last 100 years, our system was the best in the world. nafta did not help us any. all these banks and big companies had a report for quarterly profits. well, even their quarterly reporting was fudged. . fudged because $180 billion to get them out

n the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from the northern mariana islands rise? mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i ask

that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 6. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 6, resolution recognizing the significant contribution coaches make in the life of children who participate in organized sports and supporting the goals and ideals of national coaches appreciation week. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from the northern mariana islands, mr. sablan, and the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from the northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i rise in support of house resolution 6. this week our nation will honor

coaches with national coaches appreciation week. approximately 42 million american children participate in organized sports each year. youth sports with the help of coaches help fight childhood obesity, increase players' self-esteem, create leadership opportunities and give children an opportunity to explore their passion. bonding helps students stay in school. because of their involvement in sports, many young athletes develop a lifelong commitment to exercise and well-being. the benefits of sports participation cannot be overstated. high school students who participate in athletics are more likely to have a healthy mind and body. specifically, girls who play sports have better grades and are more likely to graduate compared to girls who do not participate in athletic

activities. the risk of breast cancer, osteoporosis and obesity are also decreased with as few as four hours of exercise a week. in addition to the many physical benefits of young in sports, coaches help athletes overcome personal challenges. the presence of a coach helps keeps students engage and provide support systems that can help children stay away from mischief. to acknowledge some of the hard work that coaches offer to children, the national alliance for youth sports created a coach of the year award. this i this is a prestigious award that's given to an individual that's committed to the development of children. last year's winner, claurns mcqueen, demonstrated his commitment to children by coaching basketball, baseball, and flag football while teaching the benefits of teamwork, trust, and hard work. today more than 20 million

children in the united states lack the opportunity to participate in organized sports due in part to the lack of available coaches. we must continue to encourage adults, volunteer to commit time to youth sports as this resolution suggests. mr. speaker, once again i want to express my support for this resolution and i thank representative mcintyre for bringing this bill forward. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of house resolution 6, recognizing the significant contributions coaches make in the lives of children who participate in organized sports and supporting the goals and ideals of the national coaches appreciation week. coaches make a lasting impression on america's young people. i bet that almost every member in this chamber could name at

least one coach that has had a profound impact on their lives and encouraged them to become the person that they are today. this resolution brings national attention to the contributions of coaches and recognizes the time and energy that they dedicate to the athletic and moral development of children. in addition, national coaches week aims to encourage more adults to give their time to coaching to enabling more children to benefit from participation in organized sports. it is a widely -- it is widely accepted that children can benefit in numerous ways from participation in organized sports. researchers found that children who play sports, especially girls, are more often likely to have a positive body image and higher self-esteem. they also are are less likely to be overweight. children of all sports are less likely to take drugs or smoke, and statistics show that students involved in sports while in high school are more likely to experience academic success and graduate from high

school. the role of a coach can vary from a high intensity full-time college football coach to a parent who volunteers to coach his 4-year-old daughter's community soccer team every week. many coaches in high school are primarily teachers of academic subjects, and many volunteer coaches have other full-time careers in addition to their coaching duties. approximately 42 million american children participate in organized sports every year. each one of these children is influenced in some way by the coach or coaches who lead their team. along with refining at-leets' individual skills, coaches are responsible for instilling good sportsmanship, a competitive spirit, and teamwork. i stand in support of this resolution recognizing the roles and contributions of america's coaches and recognizing national coaches appreciation week, and i ask for my colleagues' support. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: thank you, mr.

speaker. mr. speaker, i'm pleased to recognize the sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mcintyre, for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for five minutes. mr. mcintyre: thank you, mr. speaker. permission to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcintyre: thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of a bill that i introduced on the very first day of this session of congress, house resolution 6, a resolution which recognizes this week, september 13 through 19, as national coaches appreciation week. the narrative of the american coach is a powerful testament to the role that volunteerism has played in shaping our country. the passage of h.res. 6 will build upon this and add another layer of support to those countless individuals and families who give of their time voluntarily to encourage, work with, and support our nation and its young people. as well as time to hold practices, organize games, and rally interest within their

communities. i started the congressional caucus on youth sports in 2006 in order to shift the focus of our youth sports culture. there had been a report card done on the attitudes of many toward youth sports and the umpires and referees and coaches and the bad language, the ugly fights that were occurring, and the way people were putting down those who took time to work with our young people. this is a chance for us to emphasize powerful values we all want to our families and our communities. opportunities not only to emphasize things like sportsmanship, but also what goes along with sportsmanship. those concepts of teamwork, of civility, of respect, of discipline, of loyalty. and of learning how to graciously accept the victories and the defeats that we all may face in life from time to time. as a result, i have also had the benefit of meeting with our youth sports organization from all over this country that are doing wonderful work trying not to start another government program but to work with the programs that are already

working in our communities across this nation. every afternoon, including this afternoon, there will be young people after school hurrying out to football fields, soccer fields, tennis courts, and other venues to get ready to practice for their games this weekend. there will be all kinds of recreational activities going on. we need to be supporting those parents and those families and those volunteer coaches who are out there giving of their time to help support our young people. this isn't about reform or reinventing the wheel, it's about simply recognizing these contributions, honoring them, and provide the tools and resources to help them do well what they are already doing and which we are grateful. i'd also like to thank our caucus co-chairman, jim jordan frrks ohio, and my fellow congressman, heath shuler from north carolina, who chairs the professional sport caucus because they have been supportive of this effort. i remember as many of you probably do having the influence of sports in my life. my father of lumberton, north carolina, coached me growing up. i have had the opportunity to coach my sons, joshua and

steven, and in fact over 130 other young people who only knew me as coach mcintyre. and the opportunity i had to work with them to encourage them to build their self-esteem as well as the other practical benefits of sports not only in character but physical fitness and fighting obesity and a healthier lifestyle. and by working with three all american drug-free teams i coached, they also learned the dangers of getting involved in activities that can only hurt and not help your self-image and physical well-being. we all know of coaches who have helped a player make a tough decision, pushed a player to achieve things they never thought possible, and shape their sense of integrity, character, and discipline that propels them to the successes they can accomplish today and tomorrow. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support h.res. 6 and honor national coaches appreciation week and in doing so, colleagues, you are supporting and recognizing a vital part of our country's culture and ensuring our nation's youth have access to role models who can put them on

the path of achievement. with that, mr. speaker, i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. thompson: i have no further speakers, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: thank you. i want to again express my support for this resolution and i ask my colleagues to vote in favor of the bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 6. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules -- mr. sablan: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor taking this vote by the yabes be will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having

arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from northern mariana islands rise? mr. sablan: i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 459. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 459, resolution expressing support for designation of national safety month. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from northern mariana islands, mr. sablan, and the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: i request five legislative days during which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on house resolution 459 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. sablan: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of house resolution 459, which recognizes the month of june as

the national safety month and commends the national safety council for its ongoing commitment to educating the public on the prevention of accidental injury and death. the national safety council was established in 1912 by a small group of midern industrial leaders concerned about safety in the workplace. since then, the council has brought to include the home, transportation, and community. its membership has grown to over 18,000 companies with more than 33,000 locations. altogether the council represents 8.3 million employees across the nation. in 1953, a congressional charter was granted to the national safety council to lead the country in injury prevention through safety education and training. the council has had a great impact on the local level by providing a variety of community-based programs and services, including workshops, training, and conferences, as well as by providing a local

voice for safety and health education. through the efforts of the national safety council, more than 8.5 million rescuers have been trained and more than 60 million people have taken one of the n.c.s. defensive driving courses. the training and information offered by the national safety council has helped raised attention to the cause of accidental injuries to this nation. each year accidental injuries cause americans more than $684 billion. additionally, unintentional injuries cost workers and their employers $175 billion a year. each year. we know that the work of the national safety council complements the essential injury prevention and emergency response training efforts by the occupational safety and health administration, the mine safe safety and health administration, and the many excellent state worker safety and health agencies.

while national safety month is over, the health and safety of our workers and families should be a top priority year-round. mr. speaker, once again i express my support for national safety month and i want to thank congressman roskam for bringing this bill forward. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of house resolution 459, expressing support for designation of national safety month. i want to thank my colleague, mr. roskam, of illinois for introducing this resolution. this resolution recognizes the work of the national safety council to educate our citizens about accident and injury prevention. the national safety council works tirelessly through its networks, through its nationwide networks to prevent accidents in the workplace and

homes and on our roads. founded in 1913 and congressional chartered in 1953 , the national safety council conducts workshops and training opportunities to help prevent both injuries and illness. these include a diverse range of issues from preventing the spread of h1n1 to making drivers more aware of dangers of distracted driving. this week the council's encouraging parents to ensure proper child safety seat installation. according to the n.s.c. statistics, motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children two to 12. as adults, are the council reminds them to use their seat belts as well. many injuries are preventable and constant vigil lance in our daily activity will go a long way to reduce the risk. i rise today to commend the national safety council for its dedication, the important task of raising awareness, accidents and injury prevention, and i urge the passage of h.res. 459,

commending the council service of the nation and i ask my colleagues to support this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i'd like to inquire of the gentleman from pennsylvania has any further speakers. mr. thompson: do i not have any additional speakers. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back the balance of his time of the the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: i express my support for national safety month and i urge my colleagues to support this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 459. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- the gentleman from northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking

this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. . counted. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from the northern mariana islands rise? mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 59, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 59, concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of senior caregiving and affordability. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from the northern

mariana islands, mr. sablan, and the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from the northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days during which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on house concurrent resolution 59 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i rise today in house concurrent resolution 59 which is supports the goals and ideals of senior caregiving and affordability. research professionals tell us that our seniors are living longer than any previous generation. the number of people over the age of 65 will double in the next 50 years. and the demand for senior care will rise to unprecedented levels. currently 25% of all seniors need some level of assistance with their daily living. families, neighbors and private care serve this role for many

seniors. as demand increases, so does the need for affordable and quality care. there are between 30 million to 38 million adult caregivers age 18 and older. they are our friends, family members, partners and neighbors. on average, they work 21 hours per week. not only do they provide long-term caregivers help the elders, they contribute to the economy. the aarp estimates that caregiving services have an annual economic value of $350 billion. many caregivers put their own health at risk while caring for others. caregivers are more likely to report chronic illnesses at twice the rate as noncaregivers. though they serve the country billions of dollars, they have higher medical bill expenses than noncaregivers.

providing better support for caregivers is essential to the well-being of our health care system, a long-term care system and our economy. i want to express my support for this resolution and thank congressman terry for bringing this resolution forward. i ask my colleagues to support me on this bill. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today and am proud to do so in support of house concurrent resolution 59, supporting the goals and ideals of senior caregiving. i also want to thank the opportunity to thank my colleague, mr. terry of nebraska, for introducing this resolution. according to the administration on aging, the number of people aged 65 and older was 39.9 million in 2007. an increase of 3.8 million

since 1997. the population of those 65 and over is projected to increase from 40 million in 2010 to 55 million in 2020. the number of those 85 and over is projected to increase from 4.2 million in the year 2000 to 6.6 million in the year 2020. in the united states today, it's estimated that 4.5 million people have alzheimer's disease. and this number is expected to increase to between 11.3 million and 16 million by 2050. 70% of people with alzheimer's disease and other dimenchias was -- bemeantia was living at home. according to the administration of aging, persons reaching age 65 have a life expectanses of 19 years. caregiving for these individuals takes may forms.

they may live with their loved one or provide care from a distance. caregiving ranges from simple help such as shopping to conducting medical procedures. in are an estimated 44 million adults in the united states providing care to adult relatives or friends. the longer a senior is able to provide for his or her own care, the less burden is placed on our public systems. caregivers keep individuals out of institutions and help them live out their lives and familiar surroundings and with dignity. it is appropriate that we take a few minutes today to honor these individuals who give so much of themselves to provide care for our aging population. now, i stand in support of this resolution, recognizing the profession of senior caregiving and supporting the private home care industry. and i ask for my colleagues' support and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from the northern mariana islands.

mr. sablan: thank you, mr. speaker. does the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania have any further speakers? mr. thompson: i do not have any additional speakers so i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from the northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to express support for this concurrent resolution, and i urge my colleagues to support its passage. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will it the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 59 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- the gentleman from the northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are

ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 260 which supports efforts to reduce infant mortality in the united states, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 260, resolution supporting efforts to reduce infant mortality in the united states. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen, and the gentlewoman from tennessee, ms. blag burn, each will control 20 minutes. -- mrs. blackburn, each will

control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cohen: mr. speaker, i rise in support of house resolution 260, a resolution that supports efforts to reduce infant mortality in the united states. the united states amazingly enough ranks 29th in the world in the incidents of infant mortality. that is a shocking figure. and while there are a lot of reasons for infant mortality, there is education, there's health care, there are certain other issues that may be existent. health care is the primary one. and as we discuss health care in this congress, it's hard to submit looking at the united states being 29th in the congress in infant mortality that we don't have a problem somewhere with our health care system. the extremely high incidence of infant death in the african-american community is

particularly troubling. in shelby county, tennessee, the county which i represent, african-american babies die at three times the nation's infant mortality rate. prematurity is the number one cause of infant death in the united states, accounting for at least 60% of those deaths. poor women are much more likely to deliver a premature or low-weight baby as they cannot afford prenatal care or simply not educated for what is required for women during pregnancy or have access to health clinics or inner city doctors, general practitioners which may be provided if we pass a health care bill here. we must work together to lower our country's infant mortality rate and that starts with lowering the rate of premature births and educating people and providing access to health care. i was spurred to introduce h.res. 260 by the devastating rate of infant mortality in memphis. and shelby county. and i represent part of shelby county.

the honorable lady from brentwood, tennessee, represents part of shelby county as well, on the republican side. in 2007, the 38101 zip code in memphis had an infant mortality of 31 deaths per 1,000 infant deaths. that's nearly five times of 7.8 deaths per 1,000 live births. and that's worse of the developing nations i have ran, el salvador, syria and vietnam anyone fant mortality. in my own family, there was an incident of infant mortality. my mother and father's first child, rosemary, died at 1 month of age in 1945. she was buried with some other family members, not direct family, in 1945. when my father passed in 1992

we buried him at elmwood cemetery. my mother was so touched and always was by the loss of that child that she had her name put on the stone with my father even though her remains were at another cemetery where her name was also. i don't think and that taught me something about infant mortality. a mother never forgets the loss of a child and it affects that mother forever. so it's a problem that effects all races and stays with us all the time. i had an opportunity to visit africa. and in several countries there and one of which was liberia, which has a high rate of infant mortality there as well. they have very few doctors there. they don't have good health care. and that's a problem we need to deal with and we try to with our foreign aid. and i commend president bush as well as president obama for extending aid to africa and so many humanitarian efforts. particularly pep var, but others -- pepfar, but others. this month nicholas and his wife cheryl, authored a book,

published it "half the sky," which is about women in the world and how they've been -- had difficulties rising to the level that they could and that we could empower women and have a tremendous economic advantage, particularly a dis-- in disadvantage countries by giving women to participate in the work force and be educated. much of the book is dedicated to the enslavement of women but also to infant mortality. i urge everybody consider reading the book and talking up this cause. this month is infant mortality awareness month so i'm proud that we're considering this important resolution today. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of house resolution 260 which supports efforts to address this important public health problem and a moral problem and understand racial disparities that persist in infant mortality and try to make america better than 29th in the nation. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from tennessee.

mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and i do rise today to support h. resolution 260, supporting the efforts to reduce infant mortality in the united states. i want to thank my colleague, congressman cohen, for his work on this resolution. it has been exemplary and we thank you for your leadership. i also want to recognize other members of our delegation who have stood with you and with me in this work to address infant mortality. congressman tanner and congressman gordon, both who are original co-sponsors, as is congressman wamp. and we thank you them for their participation. congressman cohen has championed the cause of prenatal care since he and i served together in the tennessee senate. and i am honored to stand and work on this resolution with him now. i stand in support of the legislation, and i hope that all of our colleagues will join us in this effort. it's an important issue for

memphis, tennessee, which is, as mr. cohen said, is a community we both represent. and i hope that our conversation on the floor today will be just one more step in a unified effort to end this staggering rates of infant mortality that plague many of our communities. in this conversation, i'm reminded of the healthy start program that was re-authorized and signed into law by president george w. bush on september 3, 2008. healthy start provides services tailored to the needs of high-risk pregnant women, infants and mothers in geographically, racially, ethnically, linguistically diversed communities with exceptionally high rates of infant mortality. the goal of the program has been to reduce the factors that contribute to infant mortality. particularly among minority groups and remains a very

important program to help reduce the deaths of children each year. congressman cohen's work certainly builds on this goal. adequate prenatal care should be available to all mothers in tennessee and certainly in this country to ensure healthy infants and pregnant women. the department of health and human services has stated that children of mothers who receive no prenatal care -- and this is a staggering statistic to me -- those that receive no prenatal care are three times more likely to be born at low birth weight and five times more likely to die. than those mothers who receive prenatal care. there again, that's three times more likely to be born at a low birth weight, which makes that first year very difficult, and five times more likely to die. . this is an area where working together we can do something.

it is important our communities and also young mothers get the care they need in early pregnancy. memphis, tennessee has one of the highest infant mortality rates of any city in the u.s. that isn't a stat that only impacts the neighborhoods in memphis where infant mortality is a daily reality, it is a tragedy that all of tennessee mourns. by stating this today that the rate of infant mortality in memphis and tennessee and in america is unacceptable, we are making another important step towards solving the problem. mr. speaker, i thank you, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i thank the gentlelady from tennessee for her remarks which were so appropriate. i would like to add that there are efforts in shelby county, the blues project and the a.b.c. project that the county has to combat infant mortality

and work with pregnant women and women that might -- mostly pregnant women and newborn mothers or new mothers. if a child is born premature, it costs up -- at least 20 times as much money to keep that child alive for the first year. if their efforts, which could be successful, to eliminate and reduce infant mortality, and some of that comes through programs such as the county and others have had, blue cross blue shield has this blues project, then we can save money in the health system because we won't spend so much keeping these premature babies alive in the trauma center at the med. it's an example where we have if we have preventive care and wellness programs, we can by investing money we can save money and save so much with infant mortality. with that i yield back -- reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee reserves the balance of his time.

the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. just to add to the gentleman's comments and to talk a little bit about the efforts that we have participated in in our state, i think as you look at shelby county and memphis, you see there has been a wonderful partnership between your local, state, and federal entities to address this. also between the community and the not-for-profit sector. individuals that have said, you know, this is a problem. and these children deserve to have a healthy start in life. they deserve to have a good solid first year. and a recognition, recognizing that you have a problem is the first important step in solving that problem. and certainly we have all worked together for many years to make certain that education is an enormous component of the step forward to address low birth weights, to address infant mortality, and to make

certain that our children certainly get that start, that healthy start that they need in life. and i commend those that have worked with us at the local, state, and federal level as well as the community partners in shelby county and across the state of tennessee who have made this a priority. i thank the gentleman for his leadership on the issue. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee yields back her time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 260, as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill -- mr. cohen: i ask that we take the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the

yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of house resolution 57. and move we suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 57 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 57, resolution expressing the importance of swimming lessons and recognizing the danger of drowning in the united states, especially among minority children. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen, and the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. blackburn, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all

members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cohen: i rise today in strong support of house resolution 57, a resolution recognizing the persistently high rates of drowning fatalities among children. according to the centers for disease control and prevention, there were 3,582 unintentional and fatal drownings in the united states in 2005. this figure represents an average of about 10 drownings a day. children are most susceptible to fatal drowning incidents. it is the second most common cause of unintentional death among children ages 1 to 14. on top of this startling statistic, for every child who fatally drowns in the united states, there are four near drowning incidents that require emergency care. these accidents can lead to brain damage and result in permanent disabilities, range in loss of memory to the loss of all basic functions. drowning rates among minority children greatly exceed those of nonminority counterparts. the fatal drowning rate for

african-american children are three times of that caucasian. american indians and alaskan native children have rates over two times as high. contributing to these disparities is limited access to swimming lessons. african-americans and latinos arer more likely to live below the poverty line, putting lessons that cost hundreds of dollars out of reach. this bill not only condemns the high rates of drowning among children, but recognizes the hard work of organizations that promote access to swimming education and teach skills that help save lives. i urge my colleagues to help bring awareness to this issue and join me in supporting final passage of house resolution 57. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today in support of house resolution 57, expressing the responsible of swimming less jobs and -- lessons and recognizing the danger of drowning in the united states.

with almost 10 unintentional and fatal drowning deaths each day in our country, it is important to recognize those most vulnerable to drowning and it is usually our precious children under the age of 14 who have not yet learned to swim. swimming education programs in communities and swimming lessons for those as young as 4 years old could help lower the number of fatal drownings each and every year. the virginia graham baker pool and spa safety act which was signed into law in december, 2007, by president bush has led to increased pool and spa safety requirements and education. i thank the gentlelady from florida who has joined us on the floor for her excellent leadership and outstanding work on that issue. it's one that was important to all of us in dealing with the f.t.c. and the regulations. we commend you and we thank you for your work. effective prevention strategies

like the pool and spa safety act and nonprofit initiatives like the u.s.a. swimming foundation's make a splash program, have been successful in teaming up with local communities to offer all children access to swimming education and lessons. i want to thank the sponsor of this bill, representive sires, from the garden state of new jersey, for hess work on this resolution. -- for his work on this resolution. i stand in support of the legislation. i hope my colleagues will join me. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i yield myself such time as i may consume. -- i yield as much time as the lady from florida needs to consume as long as she doesn't mention the tennessee-florida game saturday. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: i'll reserve that option for later on in the week as the stakes get higher. thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, to the gentleman from tennessee.

mr. speaker, i rise today in support of house resolution 57, and thank the gentlelady for -- from tennessee for her kind words. we are in support of this legislation today to express our support for the importance of swimming lessons and recognizing the persistently high rates of drowning fatalities among children. drowning is as you have heard the leading cause of unintentional death in america to children ages 1 to 4. last year alone, 13 children in broward and miami-dade counties, in my district, died as a result of accidental drowning in swimming pools and pass. a recent report issued in may by the consumer product safety commission indicates that the average number of drowning deaths involving children younger than five in pools and pass has actually increase interested a yearly average of 267 from 2002 to 2004, to 283 from 2003 to 2005. i have been involved in the issue of pool safety throughout my career and worked hard with many of my colleagues in this

body and in the florida legislature to pass swimming pool safety legislation and drowning prevention legislation. the passage of the virginia graham baker pool and spa safety pool act signed into law by president bush in 2007 was a milestone in our efforts. the goal of that law is to improve the safety of all pools and pass by increasing the use of layers of protection and promoting uninterrupted supervision to prevent child drowning and entrapments. though i have been pleased to see public schools around the nation come into compliance with the new regulations, mr. speaker, it is clear that we must continue to raise awareness about the necessity of swimming lessons for all of our children. unfortunately, african-american, la seeno, and other minority groups are more likely to live beyond the poverty line putting lessons out much reach for too many kids. that's why we must encourage communities around the country to provide free lessons to low-income children as part of an overall child safety

program. i want to commend the organization, swim central, in my home county of brow ward, for the exception -- broward, for the exceptional example they provide, doing just that, providing swimming lesson to more than 30,000 children since the year 2000. house resolution 57 not only condemns the persistently high rates ever drowning commong children but celebrates the hard work of organization that is are offering access to swimming education and are teaching skills that will help save lives. i thank my friend and colleague, congressman sires, for introducing this important resolution. and urge my colleagues to help bring awareness to this serious issue by joining me in support of its passage. thank you, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: mr. speaker, i have no other speakers. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i want to thank congresswoman shultz and congressman sires for their hard work on this and for my

counterpark from the seventh district for her excellent work. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 57 as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. without objection, the title is amended.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? miss wasserman schultz: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass resolution 738. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the tightle of of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 738, resolution recognizing the 15th anniversary of the enactment of the violence against women act of 1994. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz, and the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. blackburn, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. wasserman schultz: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you. mr. speaker, house resolution 738 recognizes the 15th anniversary of the passage of the violence against women act. signed into law on september 13, 1994, by president bill clinton, the violence against women act also known as vawa,

recognizes the severity of crimes associated with sexual assault and stalking. this legislation was the first comprehensive policy package designed to dramatically reduce violence against women. its protections and provisions were subsequently expanded and improved in the violence against women act of 2000 and 2005. when vawa was re-authorized in 2000, it improved the foundation established in vawa 1994 by creating a legal assistance program for victims and by expanding the definition of domestic violence crimes to include dating violence and stalking. . i am honored to be here today to help recognize the significant program's 15th year of success. vawa intervention has helped reduce sexual assault rates. since the 4-passage of vawa, it's estimated that more than $14 billion in societal costs have been averted by reducing

the need for emergency and medical responses. this important legislationes that also succeeded in bringing communities together to address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. currently, law enforcement, prosecution, the courts, and community-daysed programs have worked together to develop long-term plans to address the four categories of crimes. vawa funding projects, training of specialized courts and teams have led to new techniques to reduce violence against women. for example, the sexual assault program created in vawa 2005 enabled our 1,300 rape crisis centers to reach out to underserved communities and provide more help. that's not what this monumental legislation has done to help evade indicate violence against

-- eradicate violence against women. sexual assault victims have been able to come forward without the fear of depour take. 1,300 victims have received visas. the national centers of victims of crime have reduced a dramatic improvement in the past 15 years in the way our nation responds to stalking cases. this is attributed to the violence against women act. undoubtedly, vawa has provided crucial federal support for criminal justice officials and victim service providers who worked so hard each day to holed offenders accountable and keep stalking victims safe. the wholeistic approach to this is linked to the improved safety and security of victims of domestic and sexual violence in their families. for these reasons, i urge my colleagues to support this important resolution, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and i do rise in support of this house resolution which as the gentlelady from florida says recognizes the 15th anniversary of the enactment of the violence against women act of 1994, or vawa. one out of every three people in the united states has been a victim of domestic violence, and that is according to department of justice statistics. legislation proposing a federal response to this violence against women was first introduced in 1990 although such violence was identified as a problem as the early as the 1970's. so in 1994 congress passed the violence against women act to protect women against violent crime, including domestic abuse. the act created grant programs to be administered by the departments of justice and hulet and human services.

funding under the bill recognized enforcement as well as educational and social programs to combat violent crime targeted against women. vawa grants provide funding for the investigation and the prosecution of violent crimes perpetrated against women and support increased pretrial detention of defendants. vawa also imposes automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted. in 2000, congress re-authorized many vawa programs, created new fwrant programs to address sexual assault on campuses and assist victims of domestic abuse. these programs continue the essential work begun by the earlier act and add important services for immigrant, rural, disabled and older women. the vawa re-authorization act of 2000 also created new stalking offenses by creating penalties for a person who travels in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent to kill, your, harass or

intimidate a spouse or partner. vawa was re-authorized for an additional five years when president bush signed the act in 2005. the legislation expended vawa to include initiatives to help children who have been exposed to violence and to train health care providers to support victims of abuse. the 2005 re-authorization also provided funding for crisis services, for victims of rape and sexual assault. the act also improves support services such as transitional housing to women and children who have been forced to leave their homes because of this violence. as the resolution notes, over the last 15 years vawa has provided federal support for efforts by law enforcement officials and victims service providers to hold offenders accountable and to keep those victims safe. i join my colleagues in recognizing the 15th anniversary of the enactment of vawa and urge continued support

of the goals and the ideals of the violence against women act. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. ms. wasserman schultz: may i inquire if the gentlewoman from tennessee has additional speakers. mrs. blackburn: ok, i do not. ms. wasserman schultz: ok, mr. speaker. we don't. mrs. blackburn: in yielding back the balance of my time, i want to thank so many of the volunteers in our community who have been instrumental in working with many of us in starting rape and sexual abuse centers and supporting those victims, especially the children that we've been able to reach out and provide additional help and support for over the last few years. i know many of my colleagues have served in local and state legislative bodies, and we have had this as a very important focus of much of our work to make certain that women and children were protected from this strike of violence.

and so i commend all of them. i thank the gentlelady from florida, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from florida. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to concur and associate myself with the remarks of the gentlelady from tennessee. as we celebrate 15 years since the first passage of the violence against women act. i remember back in my early days in the florida legislature when we were struggling and i'm sure you went through the same thinking in tennessee just to get domestic violence recognized as a serious crime. and fought to pass laws like this one around the country. fought to subsequently get a crime like stalking declared as a crime and not just get sort of brushed aside as something trivial that women shouldn't worry their pretty little heads over. these kinds of crimes, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking are taken seriously

now by law enforcement. they have the resources behind them as a result of the violence against women act. we look forward to the re-authorization discussions that will occur next year and celebrate the 15th year since vawa's first introduction and passage. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 738. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess, until approximately 6:

>> senators are spending the week on $122 billion on transportation and housing. you can see live coverage on c- span2. >> any work state democrat on how he uses technology to keep his constituents up to date. that is tonight on c-span2. >> health care legislation is on track to go before the senate finance committee next week, according to chairman baucus. he spoke with lawmakers who have been negotiating on the bill for weeks.

first, we hear from finance committee members. this is 10 minutes. >> medicaid and the appropriate sharing of the burden between the states and the federal government. it is very clear that the vast majority of their responsibility for the newly -- nearly eligibles will be the responsibility of the federal government. we have been having a discussion with governors tomorrow, i think, in the late afternoon. we also talked about further refinements how we make certain that no one who is here illegally will benefit from these initiatives. we also talked about other agenda items that remain in yet to be resolved including the handling of an assurance that federal government does not finance abortion through this

program. that will also beat on the agenda for this afternoon. we covered a lot of subjects this morning. we still have more to do. we have another meeting scheduled for this afternoon. there's a morning -- there is a meeting with governors tomorrow. substantial additional progress has been made on medicaid by getting detailed numbers back then look not only at the overall federal effective but individual effects are in states -- de effects on states. we worked on how to make sure those who are here illegally do

not benefit. there will be legal language it to let the states experiment with federal assistance. there have been some very substantial progress is. >> can you give us more details on the proposal? >> no, i do not think going into all the detail at this point is probably a productive thing to do. [inaudible] yes, absolutely. >> what about the numbers? >> we got overall scoring back which was very encouraging. it shows that we have a fully paid for the package. in fact, we are a little bit to the good. we are also confident that we are bending this in the right

way, said that is also good. >> are reviewing to see a bill today? >> know. -- no. i just described as clearly as i can the state of play. this is below $880 billion. [inaudible] states would be given resources to help them experiments on what works best including the certificate of merit programs but a whole series of options open to them on how to best make a determination on what works effectively. thank you.

>> isn't there? i do not to step on your toes. ok. today's meeting was quite useful. we all recognized that there is so much we agree on. i have made the point many times. it is true today as well. rather than one specific topic today we discussed several issues. medicaid because governors are concerned their budgets may have to be increased. we talked about political malpractice which took up a little bit of time. we discussed immigration and want to make sure the immigrants are not including -- included in the benefits. we continue to work together on reforming the health-care system and to reduce costs. i do not think that has been emphasized enough.

we want to reduce the rate of growth of health care spending in america. we went to help tens of millions of american families. this is on track to mark up next week. we're looking to bring this process to closure over the next weeks or so as we approach the marked out. we're getting ever closer to moving legislation and lower- cost to ensure americans have a quality, affordable health care. i look forward to working with my colleagues to achieve that goal. >> what were the numbers? >> can you tell us what it is? >> over the tenure. , it will be deficit neutral. it is still moving a bit, but it is close to what i have mentioned in the past. [inaudible]

it has been a.d.d. some of this is internal interaction in a different components. once they talked to the cbo, they realized it was not were to cost as much as it had previously. other than that, jill, i cannot answer your question. >> what about the medicaid breakdown in terms of the cbo? >> it is working out quite well. the medicaid costs through the expansion are not going to cost states nearly as much as it was feared because of the interaction of other programs, drug rebates which are more expensive -- expansive. also the changes that we made to

the chip program. states, i think, are right to be pleasantly surprised that there will be some additional cost but much less than they originally expected. we are all somewhat pleased. >> last one, guys. >> we are on schedule for tomorrow. there is a higher probability that it will be released tomorrow. [inaudible] we're working towards a bipartisan solution. it is not just tomorrow, but the next several days that we will keep working. basically, as senators on and off the committee began to know more about this, their comfort level is starting to come up.

i believe in that strongly and i believe that we will have some cigna the bipartisan support. >> are all of the members of the gang of six all together? >> we are all talking and meeting. >> thanks. >> president obama says there will not be another government bailout for the financial industry. the president went to wall street today for the first anniversary of the lehman brothers investment bank failure. he called for financial system changes that he says will prevent another global economic crisis. his speeches about 30 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you very much. [applause] thank you. please, thank you. thank you very much. [applause] thank you. thank you. [applause] thank you so much, everybody. please, have a seat. thank you very much. it is wonderful to be back in new york after having been at just here last week. it is a beautiful day, and we have some extraordinary guests here in the hall today. i want to mention a few of them. first of all, from my economic team someone who i think has

done extraordinary work on behalf of all americans and has helped to strengthen our financial system immeasurably, secretary jim geithner. please give them a round of applause. -- secretary timothy geithner [applause] somebody who is completely keeping me straight on the numbers, the chair of the council of economic advisers, christine m. romer is here. -- christina romer. [applause] we have an extraordinary economic recovery board, and as chairman someone who knows more about financial markets and the economy generally than just about anyone in this country, paul vogel. thank you, paul. [applause]

the outstanding mayor of the city of new york, mr. michael bloomberg. [applause] we have the assembly speaker here as well. thank you. [applause] we have a host of members of congress, but there is what i have to sing aloud because he is going to be helping to shape the agenda going forward to make sure that we have with the strongest, most dynamic, and most innovative financial markets in the world for many years to come. that is my good friend barny frank. [applause] i also want to think our hosts from the national park service here at federal hall and all of the other outstanding public officials who are here.

thanks for being here. thank you for your warm welcome. it is a privilege to be in historic federal hall. it was here more than it two centuries ago that our first congress served in our first president was inaugurated. i just had a chance to glance at the bible. george washington took his oath upon it. it was here in the early days of the republic that hamilton and jefferson debated how best to a minister a young economy to ensure that our nation rewarded the talents and drive of its people. two centuries later, we still grapple with those questions. there are made more acute in moments of crisis. it was one year ago today that we experienced just such occurrences. investors, pension holders are washed with the dread and dismay. after a series of emergency meetings conducted in the dead of night, several of the world's

largest and oldest financial institutions have fallen bankrupt, what, or bailed out. lehman brothers, merrill lynch, aig, washington mutual, wachovia. the week before this began, fannie mae and freddie mac had been taken over by the government. other large firms teetered on the brink of insolvency. credit markets rose as they refused to lend to one another, families, and businesses. $5 trillion of american's household wealth evaporated in the span of three months. it was just one year ago. congress and the previous a ministration to difficult, but necessary, action in the days that -- days and months that followed. nonetheless, when this administration walked to the door in january, the situation remained urgent. the markets had fallen sharply,

credit was not flowing, there was fear that the largest banks, those that remained standing, had to low capital and far too much exposure to risky loans. the consequences had spread farther than lower manhattan. it was no longer just a financial crisis. it was a full-blown economic crisis with home prices falling in business is not able to access credit. we shed an average of 700,000 jobs every single month. we cannot separate what was happening in the corridors of our financial institutions from what was happening on factory floors and kitchen tables. home foreclosures link to those who took out the home loans and those who repackaged those loans as securities. a lack of access to affordable credit threatened the health of large firms and small businesses as well as all those whose jobs

depended on them. a weakened financial system weakened the broader economy which in turn weakened the economy. the only way to address successfully any of these challenges was to address them together. this administration, under the outstanding leadership of the timothy geithner, christine romer, larry summers, and others, we moved quickly on all fronts initializing a financial stability plan to rescue the system from the crisis and restart lending for all those effected by the crisis. by opening index -- in examining the books, we helped to restore the availability of two things that had been in short supply -- capital and confidence. by taking aggressive and innovative steps in the credit markets, which spurred lending, not just to banks, but to folks

looking to buy homes or cars, to go to the lungs, or finance their small businesses. the home ownership plan has held responsible homeowners refinance to stem the tide of lost homes and lost the mounties. recovery plans are right -- are providing help and tax relief for working families and all the while spurring consumer spending grade it has prevented the layoffs of tens of thousands of teachers, police officers, and other essential public servants. there are projects under way all over the country including here in new york city building wind turbines, ready schools and hospitals, repairing our nation's roads and bridges. eight months later, the work of recovery continues. though i will never be satisfied while people are out of work and our financial system is weakened, we can be confident that the storms of the past two years are beginning to break.

in fact, while other continues to be a need for government involvement to stabilize the financial system, that necessity is waning. after months in which public dollars were flowing into our financial system, we are finally beginning to see money flowing back to taxpayers. this does not mean that taxpayers will escape the worst financial crisis in decades entirely unscathed. banks have repaid more than $70 billion. in those cases were government stakes have been sold completely, taxpayers have earned a 17% return on their investments. just a few months ago, many experts from across the ideological spectrum feared that this would require even more tax dollars. instead, we have been able to eliminate tutored $50 billion reserve included in our budget because the fear has not been realized. -- eliminate to earn $50 billion

trade this will take a great deal more time and work. this means we are beginning to return to normalcy. here is what i want to emphasize today. normalcy cannot lead to complacency. there are some in the financial industry who are misreading this moment. instead of learning the lessons of lehman brothers and the crisis from which we're still recovering, they're choosing to ignore those lessons. i am convinced they do so not just at their own peril but at our nations. i want everyone here and to hear my words. we will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked access that was at the heart of this crisis. too many were motivated by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses. those on wall street can resume

taking risks without regard for consequences. they cannot expect that next time the taxpayers will be there to break their fall. that is why we need strong rules to guard against the kind of systemic risks that we have seen. we have a responsibility to enforce these rules to protect consumers, taxpayers, financial products, and our economy as a whole. yes, there must -- these rules must be developed in a way that does not stifle innovation and enterprise. i want to say very clearly that we want to work with the financial industry to achieve that. the old ways that led to this crisis cannot stand. to the extent that some have so readily turned bridget returned to them underscores the need for change and change now. history cannot be allowed to repeat itself. what we're calling for and is it

for the financial industry to join us in a constructive effort to update the rules and regulatory structure, to meet the challenges of this new century. that is what my ministrations seeks to do. we have sought ideas and inputs from industry leaders, policy, consumer advocates, and the broader public. we have worked closely with leaders in the senate and the house including, not only barny, but also senators chris dodd, richard shelby, and he is already working with his counterpart, senator baucus we intend to pass this through congress. we're proposing the most ambitious overhaul of the financial industry since the great depression. i want to emphasize that these reforms are rooted in a simple principle great we ought to set clear rules of the road that promote transparency and

accountability. that is how we will make certain that markets foster responsibility, not recklessness. that is how we make certain that markets rewards those who compete honestly and rigorously in the system instead of those who are trying to game system. let me outline specifically what we're talking about. first, we are proposing new rules to protect consumers in a new consumer protection agency to enforce those rules. [applause] this crisis was not just the result of decisions made by the mightiest of financial firms. it was also the result of decisions made by ordinary americans to open credit cards and take on mortgages. while there were many who take out loans they knew they could not afford, there were millions of americans who signed contracts that did not fully understand offered by lenders who did not always tell the

truth. this is in part because there is no single agency charged with making sure that does not happen. that is what we intend to change. the consumer financial protection agency will have the power to make certain that consumers get information that is clear and concise to prevent the worst kinds of abuses. consumers should not have to worry about loan contracts designed to be unintelligible, hidden fees attached to their mortgages, and financial penalties for a credit or debit card to appear without warning on their statements. responsible lenders, including community banks, doing the right thing should not mean competition from unregulated competitors. there are those who are suggesting that somehow this will restrict the choices available to consumers. nothing could be further from the truth. the lack of clear rules in the past meant that we had the wrong kind of innovation. the firm that can make its

products look the best by doing the best job of hiding the real costs ended up getting the business. for example, we had teaser rates on credit cards and mortgages to lure people in and then surprise them with a rate increases. by setting rules, we increased competition to provide people better and greater choices. companies compete to offer the best products, not the ones that are most -- the most complex or confusing. secondly, we have to close the loopholes that worked at the heart of the crisis. weren't there were gaps in the rules, regulators lack the authority to take action. where there were zero laps, regulators lacked accountability for inaction. this engendered a systematic and systemic abuse. under existing rules, companies can actually shop for the

regulator of their chores and others, like a hedge funds, operate outside the system altogether. we have seen the development of financial institutions like derivative -- derivatives and credit default swaps without anyone examining the risks or the players. we're seeing lender's profit by learning a money to those they knew who would not repay. now, one of the main reasons this crisis could take place is because many agencies and regulators responsible for the oversight of individual financial firms and their subsidiaries, but no one responsible for protecting the system as a whole. in other words, regulators could see the trees but not the forest. even then, some firms that posed a systemic risk were not regulated as strongly as others

exploiting the loopholes in the system to take on greater risk with less scrutiny. as a result, the failure of one firm from the -- threatened the viability of many others. we were facing one of the largest financial crisis in history. those responsible were caught off guard and without -- without authority to act. would decree clear accountability and responsibility for regulating a large financial firms that pose a systemic risk. we want to hold the federal reserve is fully accountable for the regulation of the largest most inner connected firms treat it will create an oversight council to bring together regulators from across markets to share information, identify gaps in regulation, and to tackle issues that do not fit neatly into an organizational chart. we will also require these firms to meet stronger capital and liquidity requirements and reserve -- observe restraint on risky behavior. that is a lesson. the only way to avoid a crisis

of this magnitude is to ensure that large firms cannot take risks that threaten our entire financial system and to make sure they have the resources to weather even the worst of economic storms. even as we have proposed safeguards to make the failure of large and interconnected firms less likely, we have also created the proposed creating a resolution authority. in the event that that happens to pose a threat. this is intended to put an end to the idea that some firms are "too big to fail." for a market to function, those who invest in the land must believe that their money is actually at risk. the system as a whole is not safe and so it is safe from the failure of any individual institution. it's a vague approaches insolvency, we have a process to the fdic that maintains confidence and protected

investors. this was greeted during the great depression when the failure from one bank for and that the system as a whole parade of that system works. we do not have any kind of process in place to buy the failure of lehman brothers or her aig. -- or aig. crucial decisions about what would happen to some of the world's biggest companies, companies employing tens of thousands of people and holding trillions of dollars of assets took place in her discussions in the middle of the night. that is why we had to rely on taxpayer dollars. the only resolution authority we currently have that would prevent a financial meltdown in bald tapping the federal reserve or the federal treasury. -- involve tapping the reserve. we should not be forced to choose between allowing a company to fail that threatens the economy and innocent people

or alternatively forcing taxpayers to foot the bill. our plan would put the cost of the firm's failures on those who own its stock and loaned it money. if taxpayers ever have to step in again, the financial industry will have to pay the tax bareback every sense. -- every cent. finally, we need to close the gaps that exist not just within this country but among countries. the united states is leading a coordinated response to promote recovery and prosperity between the largest economies and the fastest-growing economies. in april, leaders agreed to work together in an unprecedented way to address the underlying problems that caused such a deep and got -- deep and lasting global recession. this will continue next week in pittsburgh when i convene the g- 20.

i see them taking on an important role in the future. essential to this effort is reforming what is broken in the global financial system, a system that links the economies and spreads rewards and risks. we know that abuses in financial markets anywhere can have an impact everywhere. just as gaps in domestic regulation lead to a risk at the bottom, so do gaps in regulation around the world. what we need instead is a global race to the top including stronger capital standards as i have called for today. as the united states is aggressively reforming our regulatory system, we're working to ensure that the rest of the world does the same. this is something that secretary geithner has already been working on with the finance ministers around the world to discuss. a healthy economy depends on our

ability to buy and sell goods in the markets across the globe. make no mistake that this administration is committed to pursuing expanded trade and new trade agreements. it is absolutely essential to our economic future. each time we have met with the g-20 and g-8 we have fought protectionism. we've provoked provisions of it existing agreements. we do so not to be provocative breed we do so because enforcing trade agreements is part and parcel of maintaining an open and free trading system. just as we have to live up to our responsibilities on trade, with the live up to our responsibilities on financial reform as well. i urged leaders in congress to

pass regulatory reform this year. both congressman frank and senator dodd have made it clear that is what they intend to do. there will be those who defend the status quo. there always are. there'll be those who argue we should do less or nothing at all. there will be those who engage in revisionist history or have a selective memory and do not seem to recall what we just went through last year. to them i say only this. do you really believe that the absence of regulation one year ago was good for the financial system? do you believe the resulting decline in markets wealth -- markets, well, and unemployment, this was good for our economy? was that good for the american people? i have always been a strong believer in the power of the free market. i believe that jobs are best

treated not by government of businesses and entrepreneurs willing to take a risk on a good idea. i believe that the role of the government is not to disparage wealth but to expand its reach. not to stifle markets but to provide the level playing field to help make those markets more viable. that allows us to better tap the creative and innovative -- innovative potential of our people. that has been at the source of america's progress and prosperity. i promise you. i did not run to present to run for president to intervene in capital markets. it is important to know that the very absence of common-sense regulations able to keep up with a fast-paced financial center is what created the need for that extraordinary intervention. the lack of sensible rules of the road, so often opposed by those who claim to speak for the

free market, ironically lead to a rescue far more intrusive than anything any of us, democratic or republican, progressive or conservative, would have ever proposed or predicted. at the same time, we have to recognize that what is needed now goes beyond just the reforms that i have mentioned. what took place one year ago was not merely a failure of regulation or legislation, it was just not a failure of oversight or foresight. it was also a failure of responsibility. it was fundamentally a failure of responsibility that allow washington to become a place where problems, including structural problems in our financial system, were ignored rather than solved. it was a failure of responsibility to lead derivatives traders and homeowners to take reckless risks that they could not afford

to take. it was a collective failure responsibility in washington, wall street, and across america that led to the near collapse of our financial system one year ago. restoring a willingness to take responsibility, even when it is hard to do, is at the heart of what we must do. here on wall street, you have a responsibility. the reforms i have laid out will pass. these changes will become law. one of the most important race to rebuild the system shorter than it was before is to rebuild trust stronger than it was before. you do not have to wait for a lot to do that. he did not have to wait to use plain language in your dealings with consumers. you do not have to wait for legislation to put the 2009 bonuses of your senior executives of for a shareholder vote -- up for a shareholder vote.

you do not have to wait for a loss so people are rewarded for long term performance instead of short-term games. -- short-term gains. many of these firms to return to prosperity on a debt -- a way that to the american people. there were not the cause of this crisis. american taxpayers, through their government, had to take a short in reaction to stabilize the financial industry. . .

i want to urge you to demonstrate that you take this obligation to heart, to great -- to take greater help for families who need their mortgages modernize, to help communities that would benefit from the financing, you could provide, or the community developments you could support. to come up with creative approaches to improve financial education and bring banking to those who live and work entirely outside of the banking system. and of course to embrace serious financial reform, not resist it. just as we are asking the private sector to think about a long term, i recognize that washington has to do so as well. when my administration came through the door, we not only faced a financial crisis and costly recession, we also found

a trillion dollar deficit. so we had to take extraordinary action in the wake of extraordinary economic crisis. but i am absolutely committed to putting the station on a sound and secure fiscal footing. that is why we are pushing to restore pay-as-you-go rules in congress, because i will not go along with the old washington ways that said it was ok does pass spending bills and tax cuts without a plan to pay for them. that is why we are cutting programs that do not work or are out of date. that is why i have insisted that health insurance reform, as important as it is, not a dime to the deficit now or in the future. there those that suggest we must choose between markets unfettered by even the most modest of regulations and markets weighed down by onerous regulations that suppress the spirit of enterprise and innovation. if there is one lesson we can learn from last year, it is that

this is a fourth -- a false choice. common-sense rules of the road to not hinder the market, they make the market stronger. indeed, they are essential to ensuring that our market functions fairly and freely. one year ago, we saw in stark relief how markets can spin out of control, how lack of common sense rules can lead to excess and abuse, how close we can come to the brink. one year later, it is incumbent upon us to put in place those reforms that will prevent this kind of crisis from ever happening again. reflecting painful but important lessons that we have learned, and how -- and will help us move from a period of reckless irresponsibility, a period of crisis, to one of responsibility and prosperity. that is what we must do and i am confident that is what we will do. thank you very much, everybody.

[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [applause]

>> houses in a break while waiting members to -- to return from their district. at 6:30 this evening, they will vote on debates -- on bills debated earlier this afternoon. also, removing private lenders from making federal subsidized student loans. live coverage when the house gavels back and had 6:30 p.m.

this evening. the senate is debating $122 billion for the transportation and housing departments. you can see this live on c-span. 2 dollars using technology and social media to keep constituents up-to-date on congressional issues. tonight on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> next month, a unique look at our nation's highest court, its role, traditions, and history. >> it is not an understatement to say that this building would not be here if it had not been persistence -- for the persistence of chief justice taft. >> taft believed that the court needed a building of its own. he believed that as president, and when he became chief justice, it became almost an obsession. >> supreme court we starting october 4 on c-span. and go online now for a virtual tour of the court, historical fetas, and more at c-span -- c- span.org/supremecourt.

>> topics at today's state department briefing include talks with iran and north korea. in kelly spoke with reporters for about 35 minutes. -- ian kelly spoke with reporters for about 35 minutes. >> good afternoon. welcome again to the state department. a new week. let me first of all highlight that this morning under the secretary for management, the brief the commission on wartime contract in. the department is also reaping relevant congressional committees on ways that we are addressing misconduct by security contractors in kabul. undersecretary kennedy reported

on that the ongoing investigation. many have moved or have resigned. the entire senior management team in kabul is being replaced. an assistant regional security officer is that the station full-time at the contractor's camp. alcohol have been banned there. he also walked the commission through a number of steps that have been taken from 2007 to address some of the deficiencies in the contract. let me just say that he stressed several key points. first he underscored that secretary clinton, ambassador i can very, and the senior leadership of the department were outraged by the misconduct of these contractors and they have of course ordered an immediate and strong action. second, despite the administrative deficiencies discussed with the contractor, the department did not observe any breaches of security of the

mission in kabul. for the constant oversight of the sevenrso, those deficiencies did not secure it -- jeopardize the security and safety of my colleagues in kabul. and more broadly, secretary clinton has directed both the state department and usaid to review our eye -- our reliance on contractors across the board. when it is a proper it, take on tasks that are now out stores. these questions will be a big part of the process that we began a while back, and will also be a big part of our discussions with congress. finally, while the broader

reviews move forward, the department would double its efforts to ensure that contractors are performing in accordance with our policies and values at all time. with that, would take your question. >> remind me what that breeds -- -- stands for are smart >> the quadrennial. >> that will take four years. >> this is part of a process that we're beginning, the quadrennial diplomatic development. i did not say that it is going to take four years. >> that is what i am asking. >> it will not take four years. >> quadrennial does not mean quadrennial. >> it is a process of looking out over four years across the board of our diplomatic mission here >> it looks ahead. >> in looks headquarter years. delore-- it looks ahead four ye.

>> several have been dismissed prior to these 12 cards and reports of four years, since 2005. you did not have a number then. t you have a number now? >> i am afraid that i do not. >> it was on thursday. there have been people removed earlier just after this latest. >> that was as a result of insufficiencies that we had identified. >> why do we not have the number? >> we will see if we can get you the number. >> you are seriously looking at terminating bed contract with armor group on this. why has this not been done yet? if you dismissed people under this latest incidents, more than a week to the point where you can make a determination that this company is not suitable?

>> first of all, as we have said many times, our main priority in this whole process and in this review is to make sure that our colleagues in kabul are safe. if we do decide at some point to terminate this, we have to make sure that the mission in kabul is more than adequately secured. >> blackwater is not getting renewed before you had replacements. dollars that was part of the process of renewing the contract. let me just finish what i was going to say. the most important one is the security of the embassy. another factor is that the majority of the guards there are doing the job and doing it well.

we need to look at that aspect of this. and then i think the third aspect is, we do have a contract. there are certain procedures and legal steps that we have to take. >> you had a contract with blackwater would you tell them you're not going to renew before you have a replacement. the security of that -- the embassy workers there was never held a question. you also said that the vast majority of blackwater guards were not going around shooting citizens. dollars but there was a process in place then. we made the decision for what it is worth in june to extend the contract. we had not come to that point with blackwater. as i understand it. we are at different places in the contract.

again, as i understand it, and i'm not going to get into areas where i am not an expert on it. contractual law. as i understand it, that is the difference. anything other on this? >> as far as china is concerned, a presidential delegation is going to bed and india -- to tibet and india, [unintelligible] their demonstrations there. do you know what is going on? dollars in terms of the presidential delegation, that is in india now. the white house -- i do not know if they're going to issue a statement or issue -- respond to questions as they come up regarding this delegation that

is in india now. i will refer you to that. in regards to the unrest going on in china, as we have said many times, we are monitoring the situation very closely. we are called upon the tennis authorities -- the chinese authorities to deal with this unrest in a transparent and lawful fashion. >> [unintelligible] i have not seen this in many years. >> i do not know of it as a warning oregon 53. there is a difference to the two. one of our -- a warning or advisory. there is a difference to the two. one in five american citizens on the situation -- advises

american citizens on the situation in trouble. and it is our responsibility to inform u.s. citizens who may be planning traveled to a region like this, that there have been -- that there is this tension and occasional unrest. it is our responsibility to a dead american citizens on the situation on the ground. this is something that we do almost every day, i think. sometimes several times a day. travel advisory? travel alert. it is not the same as a travel warning. >> the unrest in the trade relations with the u.s. and china. what is the state department's role in dealing with this? >> his announcement from the white house -- you saw the

announcement from the white house. the president did sign a determination to increase duty on certain goods. we believe that the remedy has crafted, the announcement from the white house will address the surging tire imports that false fully within the scope of our trade agreement with china. -- that falls fully within the scope of our trade agreement with china. we support our rules-based system and that means the rules need to be applied. >> but what is the state department's role in this? can you been discussion in the chinese with this? >> this has been a ustr track. they have been talking to their counterparts in beijing. we're not aware that we have had any discussions on a political level with the spirit dollars are you concerned at all but the

chinese might view this as a hostile act and might retaliate in ways other than what they have done for the wto filing? >> there is a system set up to address these. we will act within that system. >> you're not concerned that this will have a broader effect on u.s.-china relations? >> as i said before, we looked at this very closely and we did not see this as being in any way contradictory to the trade agreement that we have with china. >> i am talking about more broadly. is there any concern about what is going happen in a broader-you i -- a broader u.s.-china relationship >>? we've done is in complete transparency with our chinese interlocutors and we will let

the process play out. dollars the talks with p5 + 1? >> they intend to meet during the u.n. general assembly. the point of all this is to sit down with the iranians and explain directly face-to-face the choices that they have. we have explained what that choice is. they can go down one path which leads to the integration with the international community or they can continue down another path which leads to isolation. that is the path that we are concerned that they are on now, that they are not meeting their obligations to the international

community. we plan to address this issue of their not living up to their obligations head on. this is going to be front and center in our talks with them on october 1. we are not planning to start a whole new process here. this is just sitting down and having the opportunity to explain to them directly with their choices are. dollars you will not have much to work with -- >> you will not have much to work with. >> we will sit down and talk through these concerns that we all have and discuss the best means for us all to get to our common goal, and that is to make sure that iran understands it

has obligations as well as rights, and the allegations are to -- and the obligations are to provide more transparency to this nuclear program. >> any information >> >? >> it will be in a third location and that will be worked out. >> the representatives at the u.s. level? >> that will be an undersecretary. >> you're going to use this and sit down and explain the iranians the choices that they face? >> we have not had that opportunity for a while. >> don't you think that the iranians are fully aware of the choices you are offering them? they have thumbed their noses

for for the last several years. it is the same choice that they have faced dating back to the prior administration. what on earth makes you think that somehow now they are going to be willing to take it? dollars because we plan to highlight to them -- what we say in public is one thing. what we say -- what we hear in private is another. the six members of the p5 + 1, we are united in its common goal of getting the iranians to introduce more transparency into their nuclear program. as i said, we are not interested in a process that is going to go on forever. we actually want to take this opportunity -- i do not agree.

we have a dual track policy and we have been pursuing one of these tracks for the time now. >> this goes back four years. it is not produced any results yet. the iranian say specifically that they are not interested in talking about their nuclear program. >> we are going to talk about it. >> they will have their hands over read their ears. >> the secretary can lay out to them a start fashioned the choices that they face. and we're going to take this opportunity to do that. it is incumbent on us to do this. >> for some reason you think that they do not understand? >> we have no illusions about this. but we have an opportunity here to present to a united front, the five permanent members of the security council plus germany, to show that the

international community wants them to abandon their nuclear -- any plans that they have for militarization of their nuclear program. >> you will accept that for the past several years this is the same as is the iranians have been getting? >> i will accept that. >> a semi-related thing, our report in iran that the u.s. is prepared to sell them planes, boeing planes and spare parts. >> not true. that is inaccurate. >> what is inaccurate? dollars that we're selling them spare parts and boeing planes. >> what is the u.s. position on pakistan? >> any follow up? >> you said, what we say in

public and what we hear in private are not necessarily the same. >> i did not phrase that very well. what nation say in public is one thing and what they say in private is another thing. i was a little lax in my phraseology there. >> fair enough, but does that suggest that something you are hearing and private gives you more optimism -- in writing gives you more optimism about the profitability of these talks? >> i am not trying to suggest that. what i am highlighting here is that we want to explore this afternoon, to sit down with them and for us to present the international community's concern face-to-face with the iranians. >> and m1 last iran-related question, and i apologize that this is come up in previous briefings and i did not see it.

but here the chavez was quoted as saying that venezuela wanted to pursue a nuclear program with help for russia. there has been all long association between venezuela and iran, close allies. is there any concern about technology transfers are nuclear transfer on in u.s. part between iran and venezuela? >> the joint -- a short answer is, yes, we do have concerns. we have concerns in general about this with a's -- venezuela's stated desire to increase its arms buildup. we think that poses a serious challenge to stability in the western hemisphere. what they are looking to purchase and what they are purchasing outpaces all other countries in south america, and

of course we're concerned about an arms race in the region. we urge venezuela to be transparent in its purchases and very clear about the purposes of these purchases. we're also very concerned that they put in place very clear procedures and safeguards, that these arms are not diverted to any irregular or illegal organizations in the region. >> what about the idea of a nuclear bridge? >> i think i saw a press report on that. venezuela, the secretary of the npt, it has certain obligations under the non-proliferation treaty, and of course we will be looking closely at this.

but beyond saying that, let me see a fight -- if we can get you some information from the people who follow these things on a day-to-day basis. yes, if you had a venezuela. did we answer your question? >> mine was on pakistan. the question was about what is the u.s. position -- obviously the u.s. has given a lot of military aid to pakistan over the years. what is their position -- what is the u.s. position on pakistan using that in a defensive capability with india? >> anytime that we sell arms or provide arms, we put in place what i was just talking about with venezuela, that we have safeguards and monitoring mechanisms to make sure that

these weapons are used for the intended and preapproved purpose. this is the same for pakistan as well. >> selling weapons to venezuela? >> no, i was talking about arms sales to venezuela, that they would have in place that types of safeguards and monitoring mechanisms that we have when we sell arms. >> musharraf is said and the last couple of days that he did take u.s.-provided arms and move them to the indian front. any answers? dollars first of all, mr. musharraf is a private citizen. he provided very few details and i refer you to him to get the details.

as a general principle, we take very seriously any allegation of using u.s.-origin military for purposes other than what we had already agreed to and what we had intended him for. >> are you worried about the diplomatic implications of what the former president is saying? >> again, with a broad statement, no specifics that i know of, we would just need to have more details. >> when the weapons were sold to pakistan, was there an understanding a provision that they would not be used against india? who did you think that they were going to fight? they have had three wars. >> again, i do not know all the details of what mr. musharraf said. i believe that he was referring to the most recent assistance to help fight religious extremists

in pakistan. i think that was the intent of this latest round, anyway. i do not know exactly what he was referring to. [inaudible] [unintelligible] >> i do not know the answer to that. i cannot promise that i can get to the answer but i will try to. >> you're saying that we more -- we need more details. had you go about doing that? -- how do you go about doing that? >> this is a former president making these allegations. we take them seriously but we simply do not have the details to respond to the allegations. >> would that be followed by the intent of looking at this? >> we take -- i am not sure. we take these things very seriously.

[unintelligible] >> to have any other instances of these violations by pakistan? >> i'm not aware of any. >> [unintelligible] the former journalist was saved by nato forces. why is there the discrimination against afghan journalists? >> if you are referring to the incident i think you are referring to, it was extremely unfortunate and our condolences go to the family -- are you referring to the new york times journalist? >> yes. >> there is an investigation ongoing to determine how exactly this afghan journalist died.

we condemn first of all just the fact that they were kidnapped and taken, the british forces were put into the kind of position where they had to go in and free them. it was an extremely unfortunate incident. yes? >> netanyahu said that some construction will not freeze at all. he rejects all calls for that. [unintelligible] does the u.s. think that he is not committed to a peace process? >> let me take this opportunity to update you where we are with our talks. senator mitchell is in israel today. today he attended the funeral of an israeli pilot who died in

a training mission. we have a special connection to this family because it was his father who was on the space shuttle columbia went tragically exploded. -- when that tragically explode d. we hope the memory of his hon. service to his country tempers the grief of his family. tomorrow he expects to meet with prime minister netanyahu. he also plans to meet with president abbas. given that they are going to meet tomorrow and discuss all of these issues, let's see what comes out of that meeting tomorrow. our policy, of course, is

crystal clear on it. senator mitchell over the weekend met with several officials -- several former israeli officials and i am told that those talks were productive. i am not closing the door to anything, especially not with senator mitchell about to sit down with the prime minister tomorrow. >> one more on iran. you say that it is incumbent on the u.s. to go down this avenue, but you're not interested in a whole new process. i am wondering, how does the u.s., in speaking with the partners of the p5 + 1 given any kind of limit to this avenue or what the u.s. expects if it does not go anywhere, iran staged not talking? dollars the undersecretary

speaks often to his colleagues. i have talked about the way forward and as i say come on our patience is not infinite. we're not willing to let this go on forever. i think you've seen president obama talk about the time period that ends this fall. but i think beyond that -- we cannot have the opportunity to get an official response from the iranians on our offer that we made back in april. this is why i say we want to take this opportunity to hear from them, face-to-face, directly across the table what their choices, in terms of which path they are going to pursue. yes? dollars on north korea, at the end of last month, they said

that there was no formal invite the boss worth. and now they said there is an invite being considered. can you give us more information on when this invite came in and the contest, which channel, clear it up for us? >> i do not know if i can give you an exam -- and exact chronology. i cannot give you an exact chronic she -- chronology standing right here. it was obtained fairly recently. the topic of this invitation for ambassador boss worth was recently discussed. they discuss this with their counterparts. the six party talks. but no decision has been made as to whether or not we will accept

this invitation for him to go visit p'yongyang. >> it has not been met recently, but several weeks or months since the invitation came in. the new initially decide not to sell bosworth, because they just wanted to talk about direct talks between the u.s. and north korea and not in that context of the six party talks? has been -- has it been amended? >> i think it has not been amended. there is a simple formal invitation to talk to the ambassador. >> it was about a bilateral dialogue. >> yes. >> which is why you did not send bosworth? >> what we have said all along is that we will not have any substantive bilateral talks with north korea outside of the six

party context. our goal is to get north korea to return to the six party context -- the six party talks, and ambassador bosworth and kim went out to the region, and talked about the various avenues to get north korea to return to those talks. one of the things they talked about was this invitation. [unintelligible] >> i do not have the answer to that. i do not know if i will be able to get you the answer to that. also on north korea, and the others? >> to the president have lunch with laura ling -- didn't secretary have lunch with laura lee and her family? >> she met with them in their

office after their return. she did have lunch with them but it was very much a private, personal lunch. >> what was the purpose of the lunch? >> private and personal. >> so it was a social one? >> it was private and personal. dollars if you had two people that were detained by north korea -- >> it was not a debrief, if that is what you are applying. -- implying. she did have a formal sit-down with them right after the return. >> what was the purpose of the lunch? >> she was invited to lunch and she accepted the invitation. >> de invited her to lunch. >> began, private and personal. >> i question about the afghan election -- a question about the afghan election. what do you think about the elections for the second round?

what is the u.s. policy about that? [unintelligible] >> we have been calling on all sides to be patient about the whole process, let it play out, and i will take our own and buys and not speculate on whether or not there will be or should be a second round. we have said all along that we want these allegations of fraud to be very seriously considered and thoroughly investigated. there is a process to do this so we want to let this process had a chance to work. >> eight years after 9/11, [unintelligible] only for the last several baits,

only audio for a summit. you think that he is still alive portion market was delivering all these tapes are to mark >> i do not know, but no matter what he says, it does not do anything to gloss over or address the very stark indisputable fact that al qaeda murdered innocent people indiscriminately, women, children, muslims, christians, jews -- but i cannot tell you exactly why they do video and why they do body and -- audio. frankly, i do not care. >> what the arguments -- what are the arguments to say that the terrace on the tires are not a protectionist measures? >> you have to ask the experts.

>> somalia? >> i've seen some press reports. >> do you know what i'm talking about? >> the reports on the bbc, i assume that is what you are talking about. >> i am not seeing the bbc. >> shooting at foreign forces. >> yes, helicopters. >> i do not have any other reformation. thank you. come on up. >> the houses and a break while waiting for members to return from their districts. at 6:30 p.m. eastern, they will

debate -- vote on bills debated on this afternoon. this afternoon, there will debate hybrid vehicle research. live coverage when the house gavels back and hear on c-span. senators are spending much of the week on $122 billion for the transportation and housing apartments. you can see live coverage at the senate on c-span2. >> new york democrats on how he uses technology and social media to keep his constituents up to date on congressional issues, tonight on "the communicator's." dollars now, vietnam's ambassador to the united states. he talks about relations between his country and the u.s. says there normalization in 1995 and what the future holds for both nations. this hour -- is one hour and 20 minute event is hosted by the nixon center.

>> it back as cattell -- turn off your cellphones, they interfere with the system. thank you for turning out and thank you to the ambassador for turning out on a rainy day. often when we get it big downpour light this morning, turnout plummets. i'm glad that we have a full table of interesting and important guest. it is something of a testament to the importance of the u.s. and vietnam relationship. i will not -- i want to thank

the abbot of fund, some who flew in from -- the abbott fun, it is good to see friends. what is interesting to me about the turnout for this event is that it really reflects the breath of the relationship between the u.s. and vietnam since normalization in 1995. we have significant security interest, significant commercial interests, and i think that really reflects an increasingly important the u.s. vietnam relationship is becoming. the enormous a big country, 85 million people, strategically located in the asia pacific. its relationship with china is positive, and positive to us. that is an important factor to increase our relationship.

the other thing that really struck me as interesting and i think vitally important is the u.s.-vietnam trade, less than $3 billion in 2002 and is now over $15 billion last year. since signing a bilateral trade agreement in 2001, and the vietnam joining the wto in 2007, it really has blossomed into a rather fruitful and valuable relationship. so quickly, i will introduce the ambassador. he is a career diplomat, and prior to his appointment, ambassador phong was the first deputy foreign minister, the highest -- second highest ranking official, and he served as the deputy foreign minister between 2001 and 2004, and he was the assistant foreign minister from 1999 until 2003 from 2002 through 2004, he was the chairman of the committee on border affairs and the chairman

of the national committee for unesco. thank you very much, mr. ambassador, and after your march, we will take questions from the audience. >> thank you for your very kind invitation an introduction this morning. it is my great honor to be here to say to morning to all of you here at the nixon center and to talk to you about vietnam-u.s. relations. drew gave me only five minutes to talk. [laughter] that is my problem, because u.s.-vietnam relations as long historical relations. and we need to have a number of days to talk about it, to cover

the whole thing from the very beginning up to this moment. but in five or 10 minutes, i will try to cut short my speech. we normalized relations in 1995. after the long road map and i think the secretary was the one that worked out that road map for normalization. since 1995 up to this year, 2009, 14 years already, but i have to say to you that relating to whitewater or relations between vietnam and other countries, u.s.-vietnam relations is one of the fastest developments and we are happy

with that. both sides tried to do its best to promote intensive operations and french ships. the reason might be -- and french ships. -- friendships. the reason might be numerous things that we have to tackle and so on. but to this moment, i can say that we are satisfied with what you have achieved in the bilateral relations with the american states. politically, we were very

impressed and we are now with the message of president clinton to vietnam in 2000. he is the first u.s. president visiting vietnam after the war. the united vietnam, not the north or south vietnam. and the first prime minister, setting up the framework for the development of bilateral relations for the future. and since then, we have annual -- almost annual summits between the two countries. 2006, president bush was in vietnam for those meetings. 2007, our president became the

first president of the socialistic republic of vietnam to visit the united states. and that our prime minister visited the united states again in 2008. for all of these summit meetings and dialogues we have constituted a very solid foundation for the bilateral relations, both on french shriee ndship. a number of people ask me why i

was going out when we did not know who is the next president. i had to ask hanoi for this vital time to visit. no matter who will be in the white house next, the united states of america needs to have good relations with vietnam. in vietnam -- and vietnam needs to have good relations with the united states, no matter who will be the president. another reason i told hanoi that, we have great momentum for further development and relations. [unintelligible]

we have other issues for our leaders to come to the united states. it was time to visit the united states, to reiterate and reconfirm vietnam's desire to continue promoting relations with the united states. we set up a strategic dialogue on political security and defense, and we've taken two rounds of talks. last year and early this year. these kind of talks, many contacts and dialogues between the vietnamese and the u.s.

government agencies and different organizations, we deeply feel that we can expect a good future of the u.s.-be and not relations in the time to come. -- the u.s.-vietnam relations in the time to come. drew mentioned that into thousand one -- in 2001, the trade was so small, an investment in the u.s. was nonexistent in vietnam. until last year, the program of trade reached over $14 billion, not $15 billion. [unintelligible] after last month, 2009, the u.s.

has become the biggest foreign investor in vietnam. that is what i intended to do since i arrived in washington. the great help from the administration and other circles, i reach the target that i expected. the u.s. is now biggest export market to vietnam. other places like china, europe, japan enjoy bigger volume of trade, but it is the u.s., the most exported goods are to the united states.

and they are working on that. one issue is education. let me tell you this. [unintelligible] we had innovative policies of reform and opening our doors for cooperation -- cooperation in globalization of the country. in the last 20 years, we had a growth rate of 7% to 8.5% annually. before that, only 5.5%. that is the past. [unintelligible] in the next 10 years or 20 years, we still have to develop

a country, bringing up the standards of people -- the living standards of people, and what we have is human-resources, many still left behind. we look around the world and we think that the united states is the place where we could invest our education [unintelligible] so far we have 12,000 vietnamese students in the united states. and as my prime minister stated some time ago, from now until 2020, we will try to cooperate with the united states to train about 20,000 doctors ph.d. is,

master's in science in the united states. thanks for that assistance and support from the ministration, the educational cooperation between vietnam and the united states. that is going on smoothly, and i expect to gain more assistance, sending more be an imam students and post-graduate and a graduate -- an undergraduate studies to the united states. [unintelligible]