encountered a policy decision by the government which met with more unanimous opposition on the part of historians then the extension of nato. they predicted a lot of bad things that would occur. if we did this, russia would align with china in a massive geopolitical alliance. . .

it would balance through alliance with the other great power out there, a china. it is featured prominently in the argument of historians. what it failed to do is update the theory about the different settings the world was the multicolored. -- was not [unintelligible] the magnitude -- even if you associate today's russia with the nato expansion and say is because that is why we have russia, the magnitude of

russia opposition is a pale shadow of what was predicted by the scholars. they were talking about their real duke vico -- cahow geopolitical case. we have a buildup of the world with a short window for them to develop their argument. it is only later in the game that it became clear that the invasion was likely to happen. it came up with arguments. it was smaller of them what you might think. the collections of callers with the same people in what seems to be shortsighted analysis. what did they are you? i have very little time left. they argue that this was a bad

idea, primarily on the fallen argument. he is not irrational. it mean sanctions can work. war they said to be very costly. saddam would probably engaged in warfare. third is the pottery barn china shop argument. you invade it, own it, and it'll be difficult to hold together these are the key planks of their argument. my time is up. this one looked best in hindsight. that said, it is very different

in many arguments you hear now. it is -- nonetheless, it is relatively well in hine said. it is in some ways of these connected to the scholars on the theory. they disconnected themselves. they are not amazing it will have you believe it after the fact. it seems to be a constant issue that i have commented disconnect between general theory and explanation for your.

i would say the implication [unintelligible] i think there have been many calls for humility. my paper would add weight to that. i think we can do better. i think we can actually provide our policy makers and colleagues with butter in said. it will evolve. that is the hardest of a scholar has to do >> thank you for this crow commons. thanks to those papers. we have a bit less than one hour. i feared we would have a lot less than one hour.

the panelists have seemed to assume said i am more like clinton -- who tending gorbachev. -- putin then gorbachev. let's go ahead. credit in common, and i want to s -- read a comment, i want to ask a general question. i have many questions. i have been struggling to narrow it down. it is a question of three might want to weigh on. there are many disagreements. if we agreed that there is such a thing as a destructive moment or what, it is a punctuation a moment. two little questions follow. how do you know we are in one.

i ask this for a couple of reasons. we choose the 1989. their questions about whether the bush administration and the cold government responded in the right way. the soviet union was still a round of 1991 was the big moment of opportunity. i am just highlighting the there is disagreement. how much of a turning one was 9/11? the bush administration overreached. they thought the world had changed more than it had. how you know you are in one of these? help you decide how much the way the united states has a?

how much as the world changed in 1989? >> [unintelligible] i talk about how i'd talked about the punctuated. he did not believe that was true. he believe the record should you have long periods of equilibrium

better punctuated by a dramatic changes. it casses of over much of the future. -- it casts itself over much of the future. this is what it is referring to prepare to your question, i would respond, if you do not know it, it ain't one. it is really clear that something is qualitatively or quantitatively different at the core. the of the way question is a

choice of the policy maker. that is something that is really clear. you come up with order quickly. you keep your enemies off balance. >> at the same time the berlin wall opened, everyone would have known. they talked about the east germans and an open the berlin wall. i think if you are policymaker,

you cannot anticipate something like this you have to deal with the. it cannot be anticipated. the momentum of the event carried it forward. in the collapse of the soviet union, i do think -- the sinews of world order in the form of the world economy -- and did not mention neda but there --

mentioned that. and never with a predicted that nato expansion would have gone to the degree of detaching itself from the soviet union. i think that is something that you cannot anticipate. they were told it that it is extremely unlikely. i am not going to go cry about the. maybe they were united. i do not know that. it is a very instructive lesson.

it is as a critical to understanding burd. >> that is a great question. it is easy to see in hine said. when you are unfolding, it was much harder. the government -- the government's work with good to be quicker to realize the severity of the predictions of what had been true for the last 40 years were not true under the circumstances. the outsiders were slower to update. i think that is partly the result of information.

one thing's happened outside of the expectations that is an anomaly. as the defense continue to pilots that are not consistent with the pair then you have in your head, that this minister to of the third i am struck by how long it took them that much of the stuff that they thought they knew based on the cold war did not apply to great power. a quick comment on that front. we can debate this. we have underestimated the balance of power.

with the packages -- passage of time, it is a lesson less plausible. it is a harbinger of a new era in which governments are powerless. one of the reasons why government seem to be prevailing is because of all list of they are doing. if they were not doing all the counter-terrorism, the media not know the balance. the city said the of what to say about 9/11. it was a punctuation a moment. what was it? if you think that 100 years

before that, it appears increasingly that what we are saying is that 9/11 wasn't the kind of world affairs. it was taking to be won by the bush administration. i think the political costs is highly unlikely. you just cannot do that. it may be the policy makers are much more strong by political

forces th. >> al is defining punctuation no moment. -- i was justify any punctuation al moments. >> let me open it up for questions. if you will identify yourselves. >> are there other turning points, punctuation moments that we did not see? i would argue there is a long potential list.

one of the issues which the government internally debated for a long time with the reality of the soviet split, which have profound do political effects. many events became much more likely. as historians, do you think there are punctuation ill -- missed punctual moment?

>> i think the cold war began in the '70s. everybody in retrospect realizes that. to fit their preconceptions. sooner later, they will wake up. they will join the world. that is what they have done. if it makes it less, and ventris

shattering event. -- less of an earth shattering event. >> i just wanted to say that you are absolutely right. these are two very dissimilar events. the conference was to find ways to pare them we are finding ways to compare them. by no means is it that way. the way i am trying to use it is it the long-term and short-term combine and there is a

triggering event, it becomes apparent that things have changed. and trendy thing the specifics. i'm kind of a moment that are specific. they have an impact there. there are specific moment. it is not have to the western or european. that may be a vision the people will like to pass. it is coming together and a political moment. bee>> right here. >> they are investigating their

own profession. you are right. the action is supported the rights of the people of the czech republic to choose freely. they were members of. that is worth a popular point did you. the one that really concerns the. -- was one that had a great deal of consensus. it has consequences. i wonder about that. do you think when you look back, that one of the points

that stand out -- is there the sense that there was an understanding, a cause of overwhelming support that the problem could be so much more easy? there was general consensus. it carried over into policymaking. this was easier. it to be easier. we action argue along those lines. it is cheap with regards to it.

>> are you collecting them? i have no scholarly warrant. it was this position. i do not know whether what they followed up with reanalysis showing that they did. what i can say is that this.

they were forced on people at the last moment that we should go through the in -- through the u in. -- un. many scholars were very supportive. they never thought it would work. they thought there would have to go to troops. they thought it would be half a million troops. and not know what they are doing. that is the way it works. they deserve credit for brilliant strategies. they hang of this special ops. it is important to remember how unexpected it was. it seemed to be a smashing success. there is skepticism that it would work.

>> i did remember going to nyu for a series on the american empire. i did a lecture in the fall of 2001. i cannot imagine an american president not going after the taliban. he was out of office. that was greeted with a lot of hostility. it seems to me that it is predetermined by domestic policy. i thought it the invasion of iraq was not only a wrong war of choice, but it was a wound on the part of the bush administration. i think someone earlier said that al gore might have said the

same thing. i didn't think he would applaud the war in iraq. ->> i have been keeping a list. >> i wish you'd explain who were these people that replace the unit vacation -- unification of germany. it was also the colin palace thing we would take the northern side. there is thousands more troops going in. it is surprising to everybody. we are able to predict that.

there is an article by paul schrader that argues every single alliance in europe was designed to control the allies. in many cases, that was the main point of the alliance. nato was it to keep the americans in and the russians out in the germans down. if the germans would agree with that. would you talk more about the idea of expanding nato to include russia with the soviet union? what happened to that idea and how is it finessed. >> the paper has a lot of fitness.

a few carefully look, you will see that people who wear skeptical or not is the real as international scholars. they were people who were more immersed in the german question is to study eastern european politics. the ft minister going to be expanded. the key point to one to say is that the paper is surely not analyzing scholars. the scholarly analysis. i do not want to give necessarily get into your a story about who is good and who is back. i'll is wrong about most of this up. >> i did not know your ending on a strong note.

the issue of nato is huge. as soon as i got into the sources in russia and germany and america, it became clear to me that it was an integral part of the german navigation process. that surprised me. i had read it was an issue for [unintelligible] there is a huge section in the book on it. there is going to be more in print. in this time, there is even a separate organization that does a lot about managing expectations.

that comes up. this comes the very early, the discussion of moving nato. this is what surprises me. i had read that no one thought of expanding. for why, it was above. they are talking up with the nato and hungry. throughout the negotiations, he had been thinking about keeping open the possibility of trees being able to move this word --

eastward. some of this is public. they are not saying nato membership but some kind of partnership. it is not an carver to show -- it is not controversial. there is enough of it that gorbachev is up on it. he says this is his face where he is trying to come up with structures. yet come up with this common european home. they have the e-7 and some kind of security council.

baker says that is in the realm of fantasy. for pataki saying to think about it -- gorbachev keeps saying to think about it. it is never taken seriously in the west. baker later says if russia embraces democracy and free markets, we should include it. where i finally come down in the book ion nato expansion is thati can see two different cases but . i there you say that nato -- either you say that nato has become a development agency and develops this.

that i find justified. in that case, it should be offered to the soviet union under pressure. there is a native should be a military alliance. then your plan to take on all these areas. you have new liabilities. the point of the military alliance is to create military security. i can see the justification for nato and expanding. you have to see it through. >> i have a question on the same highway.

if one is that the definition of great nations, one criteria is a vibrant and strong economy. if we look at times that have changed our nation, september 14, 2007, which had to do it bear stearns and laymen -- lehman brothers, brought to our attention a long-term deficit trend that we have had as well as a short-term tremendous blow to our economy. should that date symbolize a -- along the lines of the berlin

wall and 9/11 that has affected our nation. it looks like a trend that is going to happen for a while. >> well, i think it is important for us. this goes back to the first question. how do we know we are in one of these trends formative moment? it is important if you are an analyst to consistently said yourself and arts and say, and i say this and i think i am in one of these moments, i will start fundamental assumptions. i would answer that in the negative. i do not see the financial crisis as such a moment. the reason is, and maybe i'm old-fashioned -- don't you think that the most powerful actors in the world, some of them

shouldn't these be changing their strategies? if the entities with the most capability and are not altering their strategic remarks and to do not see a sign of it, right now we do not have evidence for this being one of those fundamental geopolitical tied moment. in 1989, what we regaining with each regime that change in each passing but the evidence, we were learning that the fundamental assumptions about how a major power -- about what it was going to be were wrong. i do not see the financial crisis dramatically changing. >> i agree with that.

there is a stock-market crash in 1929. the bridge can no longer hold the world economy together. in this most recent crisis, and the u.s. to extend the bleeding, it is still a year later trying to come up with either old regulations or new ones that were prevented from happening again. there is nobody waiting in the wings to replace the united states. one can say that the u.s. was waiting.

it did not have the political will to do so. in the current situation, there was nobody that anyone complain to. you cannot turn to china or the european powers. you have to rely on the u.s. and work with leaders. that is also the definition. i think it is a very important date. it is the rising level that we are thinking of lead with 9/11. >> i have a question for you and mary. i am not clear way your

assumptions are about 1989 and two dozen one. a anderson and what you are saying about the assumptions in 1945. i understand about the realistic assumptions. i understand what you are saying about the assumptions. what are you trying to say about the assumptions of policy makers in 1989? you are saying it was non interests, not values that shaped policies. it was something about the assumptions. i like to have a clearer idea of what those assumptions were. you seem to want to have it both ways. you are staying on the one hand that in the long run the architecture that was created in 1989 was a prefab architecture the ring is the

punctuation a moment. it did not provide for long- term satisfactory answers. basically, there is a strong element that is critical of the long term architecture that was created. on the other hand, we are very quick to say that it was the only possible architecture. howdy you reconcile these two things? but how do you reconcile these two things. what are the statements? you say that the policy makers had a more correct. had it more correct than these colors. -- you said that the policymakers had it more correct

than the scholars. it seems to me that the scholars were saying that the cost would exceed the benefits. that was their argument. i'm not sure i understand why their views should be reconsidered. basically, their view was cost would exceed benefits. therefore, it was not a prudent decision. it seems to me that was correct. >> this is not an answer with a -- not a succinct answer.

if you push me, i would say i agree with 1993. he said that by 1950, the fundamentals of a relationship with the union in european countries were hammered out. he expected a negotiation. instead, we cut a korean war. -- got a korean war. they were already in place. there was no way that an isolated soviet system could compete with the kind of open system that they helped to reestablish elsewhere. i think what i said that is true

is it was like going over niagara falls. things unraveled. things started happening that should never have happened. i just think one needs to be humbled before a classic case where all of us had our assumptions happily torn asunder by the people of eastern europe being willing to take great risks. a man named gorbachev either being wonderful or hapless. i do not know. not a very good answer to your question. it is a tough question. i think we all need to constantly subject our own

concepts to examination and re- examination. >> thank you for giving me a chance to talk about this a little more. i do not mean to say that it is a punctuation a moment. it is a very successful response to punctuation a moment. what i do talk about our alternative futures. at some point, they had potential for succeeding. what is crucial is the timing factor. they were so certain that the

slow boat approach would work, they announced that policy. they have people working this. he changes his mind. he realizes he has a better option. all the sun, we did all of a sudden, it was so terrible. we must rush quickly. it is quite interesting. they were saying a word document we must not rush.

when you see the russians are not able to put their alternatives together, you want to make sure you keep them on the back foot. there are other alternatives that are likely. they become much less likely. then have to duplicate that. i see papers being exchanged. i guess what i'm really trying to say in the book is that i'm trying to question the notion -- bob hutchinson wrote that even 20 years later said there is nothing they could do differently. there is a point of view from other countries as well.

it is not something that the dissidents in poland pursing caused or would agree with. i'm trying to look at what alternative outcomes they were. >> i did not mean to say that. i tried to be very careful in the paper. there are two different tasks that are detailed in an evaluation. the biggest task is to answer the question, with u.s. interests have been better served by a different policy? that is very tough. would we be more prosperous and free if we have not expanded nato to europe? or if we had included russia in nato. those kind of questions you can

fill books. because this is a conference paper, i tried to limit it to be more specific forecasts that policy critics make, more short- term, more tractable. on that front, if you want to look at a pre policy treat the lives better in hindsight, it is the iraq war critics. they said they were emphasizing the cost of the war that turned out because it. they were emphasizing the difficulty of holding it together. they were not talking about several things. they look more impressive in hindsight. they are better than some of the policies we associate. many criticisms but loom in the

valuations, the fact that there aren't the weapons of mass destruction, none of that factored in a prewar criticism. we must establish a kind said. i do not idolize them. they look relatively good in hindsight. the weird thing is that on this particular case, they are not actually deploying most of their own previous scholarly investments. they are looking specifically at what do we know about whether saddam hussein is rational or not. that was 90% of the debate. the evidence that we have at our disposal did not conclude. that is what they spend 90% of

their time on. interestingly, not in deploying the general theory is or their power analysis or any of that stuff -- to quickly and the answer, scholarly analysis of its best in hindsight was reconnected to a big scholarly project in general explanations. >> the time is really running out. i have several people left. i'm his plan to us that the nest to ask their questions in a row. we may have to step at that point. i apologize if you have a question the we did i get to. this is the matter.

>> [inaudible] i would like to suggest to the group that one of the big punctuation a moment's that the united states missed was the reaction of the government after the taking of the hostages. why do i say this? when you look back at the last 30 years, that was a transformational moment that we did so little in that time. >> i was wondering what explanation you provided, if any to why one particular blueprint one out after 1989 versus the others and if you

have anything to say more generally on what can explain what types of blueprints are likely to win out. they discussed one possibility. it is not the blueprint set scholars are all getting behind. there is certainly a viable alternatives to that. >> most of the book is exploring. competition is going on to reestablish order. that and dignified when the book was about. i tried to imagine scenarios under which the other models could have succeeded. they were less likely than the other models. it was counterfactual.

there is the idea of restoring the status. you have the [unintelligible] that becomes more likely there is an outbreak of violence. when you strip away the hindsight, it was a lot more possible. there is a brush with terror in 1990. headquarters were broken into. there was violence being used. if the agents had been sought protection was soviet troops, and they are not getting paid regularly. they are hungry. they are selling what fernery. -- was preparinweaponary. it seems that the violence would stop the agents themselves.

if the soviets -- germany has 900 troops on the soil at the time. that is more per square mile than anywhere else. there is potential for violence and chaos. it applies letters to the east german protesters. there is a venue by which this is happening. the federation seems to be viable. they believe it might be the idea behind the german nation. it seemed to be a viable alternative. the heroic model never rally crystallizes. it was harder to judge.

you see similar sentiments throughout eastern europe and the soviet union. one thing that emerged clearly to me is that there is a real dichotomy between the people who cause the event in new because the event and those who gave the -- who caused the event and those who gave the reaction. that really happens to a small group of people. we have not talked as much about economic issues. they should be considered as well. if gorbachev had gotten his act together with european leaders who are pacifists and wanted the lesson of the cold war to be that central europe to be permanently demilitarized and become a neutral zone -- the

only leader of east germany was strongly opposed of going into nato. the foreign minister resigned. if they came up with some coherent alternative, that could have perhaps jailed. begin ge-- geleone of the greats that it is already there. you did not waste any time conceptualizing. people know what they were getting. they wanted it. they saw the benefits of it. they saw the western livestock. when push came to shove, which is the endgame in the situation,

and they voted to an overwhelming numbers. they won. >> can i just say one thing? it is a political science on the panel? >> thank you very much. let me make one must come. -- one last comment. this panel of shopping for me -- has sharpened for me a concern about pre-fab or about metaphors or about social science paradigms', providing excess of ways to our analysis. as soon as we can agree that a wallace falling, there is concern -- that a wall is

falling, there is concern about academia. we understand that fundamentally change. the question that has emerged is of it is possible to make the opposite error to have no balance or weight. this is one of the questions that emerges in this analysis. please come and join me in thanking our panelists [applause] . [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> the most meaningful moments

during my public investor -- it was sitting in the chair. it was taking the oath with my hand on his bible.

. a person's dreams are limited only by his or her desire to achieve them. his greatness in a lie in the

achievement of personal goals but in the greatness of his soul. many have blazed a trail of success but you have done more than this man to make it possible for so many others to do the same. choosing a single powerful quote from lincoln is hard to do. some regard his second inaugural as perhaps the greatest piece of political rhetoric in history. there are many other masterpieces. today ever for a quote reveals his inner life. as late as 1864, and looked like the army could still lose the civil war. after a surge in battle, lincoln realized that general grant was a man who would persevere to the bitter end to keep the union hall. at the moment of realization, lincoln dashed a short note to

grant said, "by begin to see it. you will succeed. god bless you." one gets the sense of lincoln that sticking to its own right would be its own reward. this note shows the lincoln experience more than that. he was able to in july, if only for a moment, a stirring vision of victory as a reward for his perseverance. on this anniversary of his birth, we can be glad to know that he did. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen comedy honorable harry reid. >> days after his election in 1864, presently can deliver it a

victory speech for his second term the last more than a month. he was elected an assassined moments later. we can look forward to restaging the broken bonds of our land. now the election is over. we all have a common interest, we may we unite in a common effort to save our common country. just days before his death, president lincoln during the people of washington to celebrate the fall of richmond. despite his love of the union and loathing of the confederacy, the president called upon the white house to strike up the tune of dixie. numbers the question his motives, president lincoln famously enter, "am i not to strike my image by making friends?" the genius lies in the spirit behind those words.

in the darkest hour of our republic, he showed a said a pursuit of common ground with all its light our path. with the weight of a trembling republic of on his shoulders, lincoln was transformed prematurely from a young man to an old man. in his gaze across our national mall, across our nation, the public he saved, the lies he created, his spirit burned on fiercely and forever. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the speaker of the united states house of representatives, nancy pelosi. >> thank you very much.

i want to extend appreciation to the leadership of the bicentennial commission for bringing us all here together today and for keeping the torch of live as they go forward. thank you. i want to join in leader reid and mcconnell and boehner and welcome you to the capital -- in a welcoming you to the capital. we have all taken so much inspiration from president lincoln. when we are asked to speak here today inky bar remarks short, when you go last, you keep thinking every speaker is going to use your quote for your favorite lincoln quote. i survived i am happy to every speech i would sure it would be gone.

some of it has been mentioned, but and some of it has been mentioned but after winning the presidential election of 1860, abraham lincoln traveled from springfield, illinois to, washington, d.c. you all know that. along the way, he stopped in philadelphia, the birthplace over the constitution. while visiting independence hall, lincoln was asked to speak. in any event, to speak. his remarks on that day can provide inspiration and guidance to the congress today. di not spring by the sentiments embodied in the declaration of independence. i have often pondered over the dangers which were incurred by the men who are assembled here.

i have pondered over the twills that were insured by the officers and soldiers of by the army that achieved that independent. i have often inquired of myself, what great principle or idea is it that texas confederacy so long together? it was the declaration of independence which gave liberty not just to the people of this country, but i hope to the world for all future times." 10 days later, lincoln became our 16th president. over the next four years, he faced some of the greatest trials in america's history before that, when he first came here to congress in the annual message to congress, he wrote, "of the struggles of today is not altogether for today."

he went on to say, "is for the vast future also, firm and earnest, let us proceed in the great task which have developed for us." colleagues and friends, as the honor the bicentennial, let us proceed in a great task which have evolved upon us. let us take our leave from lincoln. abraham lincoln knew that the preservation of the union was a fight for the ideals of the declaration of independence. as he said at stake is not just the future of the nation, but the future of the people throughout the world. let us take our leave from lincoln. thank you you all.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the reverend will now deliver the benediction. but despite our head and prayed for god to bless you. lord god almighty, continue to bless the president, the congress, and the entire judicial branch of government as well as ordinary citizens. res of great leaders in our day. this nation under god shall have a new birth of freedom. the government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. made the words of abraham lincoln bring the crosspiece nation for the entire year as a blessing.

let his speeches be memorized. but then the quoted in schools and families and boardrooms, union medians, prisons, and churches. make people be truly free. grant us peace and security that wars may come to an end and a new birth of freedom, in our time, making is ready to bite of rooms and act with malice. so lincoln's dream may be realized, people drawn into a creature union through you.

amen. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining us today. please, remain seated for the department -- the party of the official parties. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> now available, c-span's book, "abraham lincoln, great american historians on our 16th president. a great read for any history buff. from 56 scholars, journalists and writers.

abraham lincoln in hard cover at your favorite book seller. and available in audio available where digital audios are sold. >> up next on c-span, a hearing on extending the violence against women act. topics on this morning's "washington journal" include u.s. immigration policy. "washington journal" starts every morning at 7:00 eastern. >> c-span new year's day. a look at what's ahead for the new year. russian prime minister vladimir putin discusses the new year. the creator of the segue and the

co-founder of guitar hero on in evasion and entrepreneurship, plus the art of political cartooning. >> now a hearing on the violence against women act. supporters would like to see its authorization extended. patrick leahy chairs this shot judiciary committee meeting. it was held last june. joe biden was of course, so

instrumental in the passing of it. the landmark law filled a void in federal law. it is interesting to pass a very strong bipartisan support. i would compliment then senator biden and senator orrin hatch who were chairman and ranking member respectively who worked so hard at getting this passed. i look forward to working with the committee on the obama administration to make sure the law remains a resource for prosecutors, victims' service providers but most importantly, the women and families who are threatened with violence. we have an extraordinary panel of witnesses. of course, the first one is going to be katherine pierce. i'm glad to see you here. she is the actor and director of

the office of violence against women at the justice department. karen scott, i've known her for many years, i was just talking with her, she is a leader against domestic violence in vermont. i mention karen because people think of vermont like so many small, rural college states with a very low crime rate and everything else but we have to midwestic violence in every state. sometimes in the more rural areas it is more hidden because it is something people don't want to talk about. i know that. a witness will be sharing their personal storys with the committee. one has gone on to become a successful actor. one helped pass a rhode island state law. one has become a compassionate

advocate for victims in california. i saw the early effects of domestic violence during my early career as a prosecutor. i know that violence and abuse reaches the homes of all for all works of life every day regardless of age, gender, sexuality or economic status. domestic violence is a crime. we should never forget that. domestic violence is a crime. when i became a prosecutor, people didn't prosecute it. i changed that. now everybody knows that you have to. it doesn't make any difference whether it is a family member or current or past spouse, a boyfriend or girlfriend or acquaintance or a stranger. it is a crime. it is a crime. it is the crime. so we may make some remarkable progress in recognizing domestic violence.

more victims have felt confident to come forward to report these crimes. states have passed more than 600 laws to help this and to fight this kind of crime. we still have millions of men and women and children and families traumatized by abuse. know that one in four american women and one in seven. one in six women, one in 33 men are victims of sexual assault. 1.45 millions individuals are stocked each year. we have to keep on with these programs. almost 9,000 requests were not met. numbers like these are why i advocated for increased funding.

the formula grant program is one of these. $175 million for grant is going to give resources to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors and courts and victim advocacy groups. also housing assistance grants. that's something i authored that provides safe havens. i want to get on to the witnesses. i will put my name on the record but i'm -- the bill we have before us will make corrections and improvements so the law which has helped so many will continue to serve as a powerful tool to combat violence, perpetuate against women and family. we were able to pass this in early may.

i'm trying to get it passed now through the senate. it has bipartisan support. i think every victim of domestic violence in this country will tell us how important this is. with that, i'll yield to another former and distinguished prosecutor, senator sessions of alabama. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, miss pierce, we're delighted to have you here. i won't delay any long remarks. we look forward to hearing your testimony. we do spend a considerable sum of money. it has a very important mission. every dollar of it needs to be wisely and most effectively spent and i would want to discuss that because programs as they age sometimes become less vibrant and effective than they were when they initially started to i would like to talk about that. i would agree with the chairman. it has been tremendous progress, when i started as a united states attorney in 1981, i

guess, i sensed then that local police departments, even small police departments were coming more for attuned to the danger that occur from ignoring domestic violence. training programs have increased dramatically in most departments. they are so far more sophisticated today than when this program first passed. let's talk about what good things have happened and what challenges we face and how to make sure these program are the most productive programs to reduce violence in america. thank you, mr. chairman . >> thank you very much. senator kaufman, you wanted to say something? >> i just wanted to say i can remember in 1990 when senator biden first started working on a violence against women act. i know what a lonely job it was

getting started and it really is incredible. it has always been a great example to me of what you can do when you put your mind to it and you have a just cause and he just picked up people as he went along and clearly i want to thank chairman for picking this up and carrying it even further and improving the violence against women act. a lot has happened since the act passed. domestic violence has dropped by 50%. the women killed by husband or boyfriend is down by 22%. more than half of all rape victims are stepping forward to report the crime. we still have a long way to go and that's why we're here today and this is what we have to talk about. we cannot afford to turn our backs. on women and families in need of protection. we need to pass and reinvigorate

the programs today. so i just want to thank you for what you're doing. what you're doing absolutely the most incredibly important thing that i see in the job every day. i want to thank you all. thank you, mr. chairman . >> thank you, mr. chairman . >> i've got another former prosecutor. >> that's right. i know somewhere paul and sheila are looking down on us today. this was their passion and some of it came from paul's fighting for anyone that didn't get the best luck in life or was the most vulnerable and sheila really took this on in an amazing way. i still remember her arriving in washington with her kind of frizzy hair and eight years later she was an amazing vocket for this. -- advocate. i was the head of the county prosecutor for eight years, the head of that office and our domestic abuse center really was a model for our country, a

one-stop shop where there was a day care center and police and prosecutors and restraining orders signed and having to go through a bureaucratic red tape that lawyers couldn't understand. i'm looking forward to working on the reauthorization so thank you very much. >> thank you. our first witness, katherine spears currently the actor of the director of the office of violence against women. she is responsible for launching the office of sexual assault services program and the culturally and linguistically services program. she joined it as one of the original staff members when the office opened in 1985.

prior to her time in the department she served as deputy in the state justice institute. bachelors from the university of massachusetts at amherst. please go ahead, miss pierce. thank you for being here. >> thank you, chairman leahy and senator sessions. as you said, my name is catherine pierce and i the acting director of the justice department offices on violence against women. it was enacted almost 15 years ago and i'm i want to talk about the challenges ahead. i want to personally thank the chairman and committee staff who worked so closely. this bill contains a number of much-needed amendments to

improve aw -- avwa. we provide funding to states, tribal governments and nonprofit organizations to assist communities and encourage them to come up with innovative strategies. we are grateful to congress for responding to all victims of violence against women including victims of sexual assault. we are pleased to report that this year for the first time, they will make an award. o.v.w. has increased its efforts to respond to the serious crime of stalking. in january this year, the department released a special

report which confirmed stalking is pervasive. women are at high risk of being stalked. as the nations' understanding of domestic violence, stalking has increased. these forms of violence affect all age groups and violence within relationships often tragically begins during adolescence. congress directed o.v.w. to take action against violence against indian women. to provide recommendations on a program of research and instituted consultations to learn how to department can improve its response to these crimes. while we are proud of our accomplishments, we recognize there is still much to do. looking forward, the office will focus on a number of areas where

greater effort is needed. for example, over the years we have learned that law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges alike work with victim advocates to use their distinct roles to coordinate community responses to violence against win. while this approach has been important to our efforts we cannot rely solely on the criminal justice system to end violence against women and to be effective local responses must be informed by the voices of survivors. and also diverse representatives of the country. while it has made a tremendous difference in the lives of many, we recognize that we have left many behind. particularly women of color. i am constantly inspired by the extraordinary commitment of the women and men who have devoted their lives to ending violence

against women but our lives have most been changed by survivors. women like abigail union and anne burke who have experienced the unthinkable and have the courage courage to tell their stories. i was compelled to commit my life to this work when i read the story of kristin lartner. like one of my own daughters, kristin was an art student with her entire life ahead of her. she was dating a man who became abusive. she broke up with him after he seriously beat her and even then tried to help him get counseling. she successfully obtained a protection order against him but he did not comply and came to her workplace and insisted that she continue to see him. when she refused, he shot her in the head and returned and shot her twice more and then went back to his apartment and committed suicide.

he was convicted of multiple offenses and was the subject of multiple restraining orders and was on probation for repeatedly assaulting women. he had violated the terms of his probation in another jurisdiction and should have been in jail. i learned of kristin because her father investigated his own daughter's death in a series of articles which won him the pulitzer prize. while this story changed my life and perhaps many others, it didn't bring kristin back. every day, stories about similar homicide, rape, domestic violence and stalking remain in our headlines. this is unacceptable. we have much, much more to do. thank you mr. chairman, ranking member sessions and members of the committee for your commitment, your ongoing commitment to this issue and your time this morning. i would be happy to answer your questions. >> thank you for mentioning

george lartner's writing on that. i remember being gripped by that and wondering, one, it was very important that he wrote it but i can only imagine how difficult that must be for a parent to write something like that. i have three children of my own and now grandchildren and i can only imagine that must tear one apart. we have a serious economic crisis in this country, miss pierce. has that affected or increased or decreased or in any way aeffected the need for the services we have? >> i think it has but i think i would like to state that unemployment is one of many factors that in combination can lead to an escalation in violence. we know from the research that dr. jam lynn campbell has done

is that there are other things that happen in a combination with unemployment that causes abusors to threaten to kill or to harm. these are additional factors that we always need to look for and that unemployment alone really is not the cause. i think i should also state that we know that shelters help women avoid that kind of abuse during situations where their partner, their husband may be unemployed but also what is helpful is when judges know that they should issue a protection order and when guns should be removed from the home. >> we put extra money in the recovery act. has that money started going out yet? is it having any effect? >> i'm glad you asked that question. >> i thought you might be. >> we have announced 46 formula

awards to the states totaling more than $120 million. those awards have been made and this week 29 state coalition awards totaling more than $2.5 million have been made. we are also -- before sometime around the middle of july, we will have made awards through our transitional housing program. we received 567 applications for a recovery act transitional housing relief and we will be able to support about 20% of those so there is a clear tremendous need. similarly we received 91 applications from tribal governments and will only be able to fund about 1/3 of those. >> times change. when i was a prosecutor, we didn't have any of these programs and had to make them up as went along. fortunately we had a lot of

dedicated people who contributed everything from housing on through. on occasion my wife and i would would provide that. we have done a lot more than decades ago. are the needs currently unmet for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, stalking, are there things that we should be doing? are there things that we could be doing at the federal government, the state governments have their own programs but is there something we should be doing? >> i think we knees enhance our response the sexual assault services. we will be looking at the need to enhance sexual assault services in rural america. we're very concerned about custody issues in domestic violence cases and will be looking very closely about why

women are losing custody of their children either through the court or through the states. we're also going to be looking very closely about the problem of children exposed to violence and we know that when the children are safer, when their mothers are safer and that safety is inextricably linked. the other thing that i alluded to in my testimony is of great concern to us, that we focus on homicide prevention, more so than we ever have before and that we use research to inform our practice and we use practice to inform our research. >> the -- i don't mean the as an either or thing by any means but thank you for mentioning rural areas because again, sometimes it is neglected and it needs to be -- you also mentioned tribal

issues as well. a concern about the lack of communication between u.s. attorneys office as an indian tribe. the u.s. treasury says not to bring charges. can anything be done about that? in some of these, we don't have that situation. i talked to a number of western senators in both parties who are concerned about it. is there some way that we can get more timely information to tribal officials when they decline prosecutions? >> well, our office is responsible for providing direct funding to tribal governments and tribal coalitions. our mission is to make sure that we are providing victim services to alaska native villages and to different tribes in the indian country.

and so i would have to say that the mission of our office is not related to the prosecution of those crimes within -- with the u.s. attorneys. >> would you suggest there is some way of getting better -- -- do we need better communication fingerprint >> i was about to say there is always room for better communication and better coordination within the department and across agency and we're very committed. >> making suggestions to the attorney general and others to make sure that is done. senator sessions? >> thank you. you asked, mr. chairman, began a discussion about what our new challenges are. what i -- our studies are showing and how we can get that information out to local law enforcement. i remember our former colleague fred thompson used to say the most valuable thing the department of justice can do is to do the good research that

helps individual police departments and prosecutorial offices make the right decisions. and you mentioned some of the studies that you have ongoing. are you satisfied that the office and the department of justice programs are identifying in a very practical way the kind of protocols and procedures that would be most effective for law enforcement agency of a mid-sized city, let's say a police department, that they are getting the kind of guidance that helps them establish the very best protocols for success. >> thank you for asking that. i think, yes, the answer is yes. with the help of some national law enforcement organizations. we have been able to develop what i think are clear protocol and practices and you should be aware that we are also going to

be updating what we are -- what we call a manual on promising practices looking at law enforcement. i think the thing for us to remember is that since the vawa was passed we have a whole new generation of police officer who is need to be re-educated on those protocols you just mentioned. we don't need to go back and reinstrent wheel. we have done some significant work in that area. what we need to do is continue to educate. >> the story about kristin, that is such a powerful story. i guess my question is could that stalker have been identified earlier? could we have -- do we have any kind of identifying characteristics that say this is an abusive person?

but this was an abusive person who could be become homicidal and dangerous? did the average prosecutor and judge and police department -- do they know what these are and are they making the right identifications of the most dangerous people? >> thank you for raising that. i think we do have those indicators. i think we have that knowledge. i mentioned some of what those indicators were in the case of kristin larder in. i think a lot of those were present. she did everything right. >> what are some of -- >> well, in her case, i mean, she went -- >> sought a protective order -- >> but the problem was, as i understand it, she got a protection in order boston but he had been arrested across state lines, in new york.

we obviously need databases that speak to one another and it would be great if every judge can pull up that information on the bench. that is something we need to continue to do. in lieu of that, i think our institutions that we need to support, the chiefs of police that we support are way s of getting that information out. we have the information and we need to get it in the hands of local practitioners. >> i really think that's true. be -- but just because you do a study and issue a report in washington does not mean that a busy prosecutor or busy judge has had the opportunity to study it and i don't know how we -- we -- and i assume there is some disputes about what the best protocols are on various types of circumstances. but i would assume there is some areas in which there is

uniformity of agreement that under these circumstances this represents a real danger and strong action should be taken. would you agree? >> i entirely agree with you. >> make sure that that information is more widely spread. that we have effective enough programs to get that information out. >> i think we do. i think we need to continually reach out to prosecutor coordinators and to you know, national associations that can provide us with lists of prosecutors who we can go to and say please, we need -- we have this training. we're making it available with funding and actually we have been quite successful in doing that but we can always do better and we continue to try to enhance, as you said, those databases of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officers in every state. i have to say, we have created, as a result of that -- those

educational programs, dedicated units like in minneapolis and st. paul and other parts of the country. >> i think in virtually every community has a more specialized units, protective houses for women and children who have been abused and that. i'm real pleased by that but i would say continue the good research. continue to get the information out so it can be utilized and we'll have fewer of these cases like kristin, it is my personal view that a lot of individuals unfortunately are very dangerous and the number of people who would actually kill somebody or stalk somebody consistently or sexually assault somebody is not that large in this country, if they are properly identified. some of them need to be detained and locked up for the offenses they commit and that will perhaps prevent offenses in the

future. so i thank you. mr. chairman . >> thank you very much, senator sessions. >> thank you very much. miss pierce, i always have thought that one of the real beauties of vawa is how it tried to encourage community-based responses and getting groups involved. our own experience how this worked is we actually got our hospital involved. we had victims advocates accessible to people. they were part of the community response. we actually started a post-review process for cases where the thought was something might have gone bad or maybe something didn't go bad, kind of when they do surgery after a hospital looks at all their errors to figure out what went wrong. we did it not publicly but we got all the partners together to figure out what went wrong. sometimes there were little things. a police department not eapsing a phone call or someone not chick checking a computer system

and we were able to do a better job because we did those reviews. do you want to talk about that coordinated community response and how you think it has contributed to the value of avwa? >> definitely. let me say i did visit your office and saw what an extraordinary job you all were doing several years ago and continue to do so thank you for that. as i alluded to this my comments, i think that coordinated community responses will only be strengthened when we begin to turn to the communities, particularly the diverse communities who we are charged with responding to. i think we have not done a good enough job of listening to the voices of survivors but i -- you alluded to something, which i think has been extraordinary and an excellent tool which is the safety audits that were developed by one of our grantees.

a tool to pull a community response together by looking at cases and figuring out where women fall through the cracks and who could have done a better job without shaming or blaming or pointing the finger. that is one of the most useful tools that we have had. it is for law enforcement officers to work with advocates in balance and listen to them and survivors. i can't underscore it enough. >> right. one of the things i know that is always frustrating for some of our prosecutors and the victims was the enforcement of protection orders across jurisdictional boundaries. i know you have been looking into that. could you talk about what you think we could do better with that? >> well, i think as i said earlier, we really -- if we could begin to develop databases that were more reliable, for prosecutors, for judges, for law

enforcement, i think that would make an enormous difference. >> another thing that -- just thinking of my list of things if my victim advocate were here would ask, just the rape kits. i believe the violence prohibits from charging victims of sexual assault the cost of producing their rape kit but there are many instances where the victims end up paying the price. should we be taking more steps upfront to ensure that no one has to pay for the rape kit? absolutely un equivocably. >> it happens all the time. i'm not making this up. i know that it happens all the time.

i think people would be surprised if they knew the facts. last year it was discovered that los angeles county has the biggest backlog of untested rape kits of any jurisdiction in the country. almost 13,000 untested kits as of last summer. even if they are the worst offender, it is really a national problem. at one point it was estimated that there were 400,000 untested kits nationwide. as we look at this reauthorization, is this something we should be looking at as well? >> yes, qunk we need to be looking at ways that our office can cord night more effectively with other parts of the department to make sure this backlog gets addressed across the country. >> thank you very much. appreciate your work. >> thank you very much. did you have a follow-up question? >> just one, if i could. what do you think about the requirement in 2005 congress

created a funding incentive to cause states to test rapists, the perpetrators for h.i.v. within 48 hours, i believe after arrest. is that being feblingtively done? is that a good policy -- effectively done? should every state test sexual perpetrators for h.i.v.? >> we definitely believe that women who have been exposed to h.i.v. certainly have the right to request that the offender be be tested but as we all know, those of us who have worked in the criminal justice system for years, it isn't always so that the an herned is apprehended within 48 hours or so, so what we're focused on is being able to provide the victim with the ala terntive to receive counseling. our focus is on her. what we have learned is that about 84% of state and local

governments who receive funding through the grant program that you're referring to, the grants to encourage arrest program are unable to meet that requirement so what we want to do is to -- >> why? >> it could be any number of reasons but not the least of which is that the offender is not always available within that period of time. >> that's obvious. they can't do it if they are not arrested but for those who are arrested, i don't know why that wouldn't be just a standard protocol? >> i think it is about giving the offender -- it is about giving the victim an alternative. we need to have -- yes, we need to do -- we need to test. >> what information do you have that every department should have -- test a rapist for h.i.v.? >> i don't. >> well, ok. we got a law that says it. you're changing subject on me. i just don't understand what the

hesitation -- >> no, no, no. i'm just saying that victims where that offender is not available, we need to give the victim -- >> ok. >> we need to put our focus on the victim and provide an alternative for her. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator, do you have any follow-up? >> no. >> thank you very much, miss pierce. thank you for being here and thank you for the e sis you put on this. >> thank you very much. thank you for all of your work. appreciate it so much. >> we're in this one together. and we'll call up the other.

>> thank you all for being here. we're going to start with gab reel union. an accomplished actress. she has made appearances in more than 20 films. when she is not acting she serves as ambassador for the susan g. komen for the cure.

my wife and i have been on not the run but the fast walk on a number of days for the cure. she is an advocate for victim's sexual assault. a gratton of ucla where she received a bachelors in sociology. miss union. let's say the words sexual assault. altogether now. sexual assault. it is a little crazy. if we can't say the words we can't effectively begin to deal with the problem. at 19, i got a summertime job. while i was at work one night, a man came into the store, robbed the store and during the course of the robbery decided to rape me. during the course to have rape, he calmly put the game down he had been holding to my head. he said do you mind handing me

my gun. i tried to kill him. i missed. we began to tussle and he beat me beyond recognition. luckily enough. i hate to say this. i had the privilege of being raped in a wealthy community. the police arrived within medicine minutes. it is a police department that was adequately funded and staffed. they immediately took my statement. they were well-trained. we immediately went to the rape crisis center where they took my rape kit and i was able to start the path from rape victim to rape survivor. and i cannot say enough about the difference it made that i was raped in a wealthy community. with an adequately funded and staffed rape crisis center. i immediately began to get the treatment that i needed. within days my rape kit was tested and analyzed and within a

few days after that, my rapist was apprehended an within a few months he took a plea and i had my squiss. it is rare. it does i had my justice. it is rare. it does not happen. i work very closely with law enforcement and what they always say is we don't have too the time or resources to help get a rape victim between victim and survivor. rape victims, they say, make terrible witnesses. rape survivors are amazing and fenthive to help us get rapists off the street. if you want to bottom line it, having adequately funded rape crisis centers helps gets rapists off the streets. rapists don't go away at tend of the day to rape land where we would like to think they go.

they are raping our mothers and daughters and grandparents. we have to help police and law enforcement to get them off the streets. we have to be advocates for the victims and help them lead happy, productive lives. it starts with adequate funding. to tell a brief story sh i was in africa sitting at the bar and there was an image of paris hilton and her little dog on tv. it got the bar all riled up and they start telling these jokes. a man said silly americans, you care more about your pets than you do about your people. they will spend tons of money to put a man away for beating a dog. but not his wife. if you're ever in america, beat your wife and not your dog and you won't go to jail. we have to make human beings a priority and our women and children a priority and keeping them safe. it starts with adequately

funding these programs with domestic violence programs and sexual assault programs. it has become a sad reality when i go to third world countries and speak to women and give them the just hang in there speech, i find i have to give the exact same speech to women in america. in third world countrieses, we don't have an expectation of criminal justice. there is no justice in those countries. no chance for charli: and hand holding. i have to give this same exact speech to girls and women in america. we're supposed to be better than that and we're not. we have to do better. thank you. >> karen has been the director of the vermont network against domestic violence and sexual assault since 2007. i have worked with her a lot during that time, before she came to vermont, she worked at various victims services, in

ohio for 15 years. received her bachelors degree from bowling green state university. her masters degree. currently lives in heinzeberg, vermont, where the head of my vermont office lives. the vermont network that she leads, a member of the coalition of national network against domestic violence. i would like to thank members of the board and staff who work tirelessly on behalf of everybody here and please, when you go back, give my thanks and i -- i think it would be fair to say, give ourselves thanks, too. go ahead. >> jeremy leahy, ranking member sessions and distinguished members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to discuss the success of the violence against women act or avwa. and the importance of

reauthorizing it in 2011. it is a statewide coalition of domestic and sexual violence program and our 15-member programs are located throughout the state and provide life saving services to victims and their families. they are a critical part of our work in vermont and across the country and i'm here today to discuss the success of avwa programs and the need to strengthen avwa in 2011. the crime of domestic violence is pervasive and life-threatening. one in four women will experience domestic violence in her lifetime. of course the most heinous of these crimes is murder. in 2005 alone 1,181 women were murdered by an intimate partner in the united states. even in one of our nation's safest states, vermont, there were seven domestic violence-related homicide and three suicide in just one week

in 2007. additionally, the cycle of intergenerational violence is perpetuated by children-witnessed violence. in addition to the terrible cost of domestic violence and the cost on the lives of individual families, these crimes cost taxpayers and communities. however, in addition to saving and rebuilding lives, avwa saved taxpayers $14.8 billion in the first six years alone. it was not only the right thing to do but is also fiscally sound legislation. it has improved the national response the domestic and sexual violence. the rate of nonfate offensive line intimate partner violence against women has decreased by 63%. remarkably the number of those

killed has decreased by 24% for women and 48% for men. my written testimony details impact of avwa grants, legal assistance to victims grants. protection orders. each of these funds has created systems to which adults and children can find paths to more peace and safer lives. i've had a first hand view of the impact of avwa. i would like to highlight three programs. it has helped to educate an entire generation of police officers and prosecutors against violence against women. and to drop and strengthen victims services in cases of violent crimes against women. i can personally atoast a study which said grants have ensured that victims are safer and

better treat bid their communities. grants allowed jurisdictions to develop and implement programs. in vermont, our statewide rural grant program has created an innovative specialized department for the department within children and families which reviews 100% of cases where domestic violence may be present. for the first time in fiscal year 2008 the sexault services program was fund and will begin to meet the extreme needs of victimsor sexual assault. this grant will allow states, tribes and territories to provide much-needed direct services to victims and various services including law enforcement, rain crisis centers will be able to provide expanded

medical support to victims of rape around sexual assault. it is critical to the creation of services and collaboration of relationships that will result in safer communities. more and more victims are coming forward each year. however this rising demand for services without concurrent increases means many a turned away from necessary ssts. nearly 9,000 requests went unmet across the country due a lack of resources. services for sexual assault victims are more scarce and underfunded. women, children and men are actually on waiting lists to receive treatment and therapy after sexault. the violence against women act is working but the job is not done. alavwa has done much to republic victims, so much more is needed. we must strengthen avwa. whether they live in rural or

urban areas whether they speak english or another language. congress has a unique opportunity to make a difference in the lives of so many by reauthorizing the violence against women act. thank you chairman leahy. ranking member sessions and the distinguished members of the committee for all you have done and all you will do to help victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. thank you. >> thank you very much. anne burke is our next witness. i think you wanted to say something about miss burke. of course having been married to a registered nurse for 47 years, i'm glad to have you here although i'm sorry for the reason you are here. >> thank you, mr. chairman . i just want to welcome miss burke here. rhode island is a small state. i don't think there was a person in the state who was not aware of the tragedy that befell her

family and the terrible way in which her life changed when lindsay was murdered by an ex-boyfriend at the age of 23. we have also been very inspired by the way that anne as a teacher and a nurse has taken what for many would be a disabling calamity in their life and turned it for as much good as one could possibly imagine that could be achieved out of such tragedy. she has fought for along with her husband chris, obtained passage of the lindsay anne burke act which requires programs in high school to support awareness of teen dating violence and support in the schools for those programs. she started the lindsay anne burke memorial fund to provide support for those efforts and she has co-founded a group called moms and dads for

education to stop teen dating abuse, which is a parent support network for parents across the country to support healthy teen dating relationships and cope with the tragedies that still take place. so she is somebody rhode island is very proud of. we've shared with her, as much as the public can, such a deeply private tragedy and we've seen what wonderful success she has drawn from that tragedy so she is an inspiration to many of us and i welcome her here today. >> thank you. ms. burke, please go ahead. >> chairman leahy, ranking member sessions and distinguished members of the community. thank you for the opportunity to testify today on increasing awareness of dating abuse. i appreciate the opportunity to share my daughter lindy's story and the positive legacy that has come from her loss. my husband chris is