dynamic, science and technology companies like synbiotics to missouri. that's exactly what we want to do. that brings me to the third part of my 2010 jobs plan. it focuses on missouri's greatest asset: our people. "training for tomorrow" is a new initiative to train more missourians for jobs in growing fields, like lab techs, nursing aides, surveyors and mechanics. it gives community colleges the flexibility to enlarge training programs where there's high demand, and ensures there are enough workers to meet that demand. in addition, i've proposed a 20 percent increase in funding for customized training programs tailored to the needs of specific high-tech industries. by matching industry's needs with training programs, more missourians will be able to find work quickly. much of this training will take place at missouri's excellent community colleges.

there's no place where the link between education and employment is stronger. i was at crowder college in neosho not long ago. president alan marble told me that if someone is out of work, they should go to the dean's office today. they can sign up for a career training program - in alternative energy, health care, or drafting and design - and if they're willing to give it their all, he'll help find them a job. tonight, i call on you to show that same can-do spirit. let's roll up our sleeves and pass this 2010 jobs plan.

there's another group of missourians eager for work, who have real-world job experience and first-rate training from uncle sam. i'm talking about our veterans. when i was in iraq and afghanistan last summer, the troops invariably asked me two questions: "how is pujols doing?" and "will there be a job for me when i get home?" tonight, i'm proud to announce the creation of "show-me heroes," our new jobs initiative just for our veterans. the leader of this effort is lieutenant colonel alan rohlfing of the missouri army national guard. he'll be calling on employers all over the state, telling them about our disciplined, dedicated, hard-working veterans. when a job comes open, i want a veteran's resume on the top of the stack, so they get first

crack at an interview. i'm asking every employer in this state to step up and show that missouri hires its veterans. for veterans who are ready to retire, missouri's also the first place to look, because we're going to continue to phase out the state income tax on military pensions until it's zero dollars. [applause] veterans are not the only ones who can get tax relief in missouri this year. we're also helping homebuyers. we're putting $15 million into an effort to give the housing industry a boost and help more missourians afford the american

dream. if you want to buy a house in 2010, the state will pick up your property taxes for the first year, for up to $1,250. and we're offering another $500 in tax relief if you make that house more energy efficient. this will help put thousands of missouri families in new homes, jumpstart the housing market and give our skilled tradesmen more green jobs. in this tough economy, we've also got to protect vulnerable missourians from a voracious predator: payday loan companies. hard times are like fertilizer for payday lenders; they just pop up overnight, like mushrooms. for folks caught in a bad situation - maybe they lost their job, or the car broke down - payday loans may seem like the best option.

but missouri families shouldn't get fleeced. according to the most recent data, the average payday loan in missouri was $290 - at 430 percent interest. and even at those exorbitant rates, you know how many loans were reported? close to three million. missouri laws aren't tough enough to protect folks caught in this downward spiral of debt. we need to stand up for them, and pass meaningful payday loan reform this year. by any measure, 2009 was a rough year. in one way or another, the downturn hit everybody's pocketbook. missouri unemployment ran under the national average, but was still too high.

a lot of friends and neighbors were out of work. too many missourians lost their homes, farms and businesses. folks who hung onto their jobs saw their wages and benefits whittled away. the impact of those economic blows knocked the wind out of state government. revenue fell a staggering $778 million short of projections - the biggest one-year drop in missouri history. so state government did what every missouri family had to do: tighten our belts, stretch every dollar and rein in spending. we did not bellyache about it. we just did it. we focused on our priorities, worked together, and made some real progress. unlike 29 other states, we balanced the budget without raising taxes.

how did missouri do it? we made state government leaner. in one year, i will have reduced the state workforce by nearly 1,800 positions. we used technology to make government more efficient and effective. we cut costs by renegotiating contracts. i ordered state department heads to conserve energy, and we reduced our utility bill by six percent. i had to cut $600 million out of the state budget, but did so without losing sight of priorities like education and public safety. and in terms of efficiencies, we're not finished yet. for years, state government has been creating boards and commissions for this centennial or that special interest. some do good work, while others don't do much of anything.

nobody paid much attention to them, and they just kept growing and growing until they turned into bureaucratic kudzu. in an effort to root out government waste and inefficiency, i have already eliminated 13 of these boards and 227 positions. and i call on the legislature to haul out the brush hog, and get rid of 18 more boards and 246 more positions. working together, we've been able to avoid the meltdowns we're now seeing in other states: massachusetts and nevada jacked up their sales tax. arizona's on the verge of closing two-thirds of its state parks and selling its house and senate buildings. nevada's governor has proposed cutting k-12 funding by $700 million.

that's not going to happen here in missouri. our early action and sound management have helped missouri keep its spotless triple-a credit rating. that saves taxpayers millions in interest each year. and it signals investors that missouri is where smart money goes to grow. moody's investors services, one of the nation's premier financial ratings firms, rated missouri one of the top states to lead the nation's recovery. by balancing the budget without raising taxes, making hard choices, and managing debt, missouri is in a strong position to accelerate out of this downturn. we could never have accomplished that without steadfast bipartisanship. i want to thank all of you for

standing together last year and putting missouri first. we must summon that same bipartisan spirit for the hard work that lies ahead. this year, although we're in better shape than other states, we still face sobering fiscal challenges. revenue projections for fiscal 2011 are austere; we'll have less revenue than we did in 2009. it will take the patience and good faith of every person in this general assembly - all 163 members of the house and all 34 members of the senate - working as a team, to manage our limited resources and move missouri forward on the path to prosperity. while we are taking steps to get immediate economic returns, we also need to be making strategic investments to secure missouri's long-term economic growth:

investments in our children's education; in health care; in communities that are safe and vibrant; and in the beauty and bounty of our state. in our rapidly changing world, the education of missouri's children is a high-stakes enterprise. missouri can't succeed unless our schools succeed. and wherever students excel, we have dedicated teachers to thank. all across the state, our public schools are stronger for the commendable work teachers do. and i'm not just talking about the work that goes on in classrooms from the first bell on monday morning to the last bell on friday afternoon.

i'm talking about the extra hours teachers put in before class, giving students extra help with math or english. and the weekends teachers devote to ap prep and band competitions. for these exceptional people, teaching isn't a job - it's a calling. criticizing public education is easy - and cheap. educating children is hard - and takes serious investment. it's not enough to tell our teachers how much we value them; we must show them. and that is why my budget this year includes continued funding for career ladder.

our teachers have earned it. last year, we provided record funding for k-12 classrooms, even in the face of severe economic challenges. other states, like kansas and georgia, are restricting education funds already appropriated. let me be clear: every penny appropriated by the legislature last year will go to our k-12 classrooms this year. our budget challenges next year are no less daunting. until the revenue picture changes, most folks in government understand that getting the job done with fewer resources is a given. but budgets are about protecting priorities. and as we discussed my budget, and where and how much to cut, i took one thing off the table: k- 12 classrooms.

our children are precious. their education is too important. so even in these difficult times, i am recommending increased funding, at a record level, for our k-12 classrooms. our commitment to education must extend beyond high school. but for too long, steep tuition hikes have put college out of reach for many missouri families. tom and sandy ray, who live in st. louis have three kids in college at the same time. that's a big price tag for a working family, but tom and sandy understood the value of a college degree and were willing to make the sacrifice. when their family budget suffered a blow last year, they wondered how they'd manage to pay all three tuition bills.

but last year, we froze tuition at all two- and four-year public colleges and universities in the state. for thousands of families like the rays, that was a godsend. please welcome these two terrific missouri parents, tom and sandy ray. but we're not done. i call on you to join me - and lead the nation by example - in supporting another tuition freeze this year. that would mean missouri students and their families won't have to pay a penny more in tuition and fees two years in a row.

i want to bring college within reach for even more missouri students, by addressing a blatant inequity in missouri's a+ scholarship program. that program pays two years of community college tuition for high school kids who keep up their grades, give back, and stay out of trouble. today, a third of the kids in missouri's public high schools can't even apply for these scholarships. that's because their schools aren't "officially designated" as a+ schools. and that's just not fair. a+ scholarships should be open to every hard-working public high school student in missouri. and i count on your support to make that happen this year.

our children are growing up in a high-speed, digital world; just watch them texting their friends. without access to the fast lane on the information superhighway, we'll simply be a dusty detour. this year, missouri is competing to bring high-speed internet to every part of our state, from the urban core to the last mile of gravel road. for a small business like strawberry's bar-b-que in holcomb, that means instant access to customers from jamaica to japan. a college student could take courses on her laptop in fair play.

we will help them stay competitive. we bet we will. if there is a correlation between a state's competitiveness and the cost of health care. last year, missouri was poised to make real progress on health care. the missouri senate voted overwhelmingly to support my plan to provide health care to 35,000 working missourians at no additional cost to state taxpayers. unfortunately, that proposal failed on the last day of the session. this year, there's been a lot of talk about health care, from the halls of congress to town hall meetings across the country. congress is debating significant health care legislation. if that federal legislation passes, it's our job to show

steady, bipartisan leadership and maximize the benefits for people of our state. there's another important health care issue that demands our immediate attention: autism. this spectrum of disorders is diagnosed in one in 110 children. and the sooner it is diagnosed and treated, the better their lives will be. myles and lora hinkel have a 7- year-old son, blake, who has autism. myles and lora have been outstanding advocates not just for their son, but for all children with autism. please welcome the hinkels tonight.

blake's father tells a moving story about hearing his son speak his first word at the age of three. reaching that milestone took months of intensive therapy at the thompson center for autism in columbia. it was an enormous victory for blake, summed up rather nicely in that first word: "mine". when the hinkels' insurance company refused to pay for blake's therapy, they willingly took the hit. because they know there is a critical period of time to turn on the light in the developing brain of a child with autism. and if that critical time passes, the light goes out. children with autism shouldn't have to wait for their parents

to come up with the cash, or for insurance companies to grow a conscience. they need our help now. for months, i have stood with democratic and republican legislators on this issue, and laid out the key elements of a bill that we all know will make a real difference in these children's lives. this is the year we stand up to insurance companies. this is the year we make them cover autism. this is the year we turn on the light for thousands of children like blake hinkel. there's another young man i'd like to tell you about. his name is travis, and he's up

in the balcony tonight with his family. when travis was 8, both his legs were crushed in a car accident caused by a drunk driver. travis and his mom, karen, almost died from their injuries. they told me they feel lucky to be alive. travis is 11 now; he's had five operations on his legs so far, and he'll need three more. but he's making steady progress. please welcome this brave young man and his family. the man behind the wheel of the car that hit travis and his

family had a prior conviction for drunk driving. but there he was - drunk again - coming at them the wrong way on an exit ramp. travis and his family paid a terrible price for that man's terrible crime. and that's why i have proposed legislation to effectively prosecute and punish drunk drivers and - most important - yank their licenses, and get them off the road before they shatter more lives. i urge you to send that bill to my desk this year. any long-term strategy for improving missouri's economy, and enhancing our quality of life, must take full advantage of our natural heritage, our wid caves and our canyons, our plains and our prairies. hunting, fishing, hiking and

camping are part of our missouri way of life. that they are. when i was a kid, i did a lot of fishing with my dad. we'd get up early, toss our gear in the back of the station wagon and head down to bennett spring or montauk. i'd be hip-deep in cold water before the mist had rolled off the river. i spent many golden hours learning to read the river, learning to tie flies that could fool a trout. that kindled my love of the outdoors, which i passed along to my sons - and i hope they'll pass along to theirs. we need to get more kids off the couch, away from their videogames and back outdoors, because there are some lessons

that only nature can teach. tonight, i am pleased to announce the creation of the missouri state parks youth corps. we'll put more than a thousand young people to work this summer at our 85 state parks and historic sites. our park system is a legacy passed on to us by missourians of extraordinary vision and generosity. missourians like edmund babler, peter bennett and leo drey; annie van meter, and ted and pat jones. even in these lean times, we have a responsibility to be good stewards of these treasures, and preserve them for future generations. my parks youth corps will learn to be good stewards of the land from the ground up: picking up trash, cutting brush, and building trails. they'll also be outdoor ambassadors in my effort to reverse a 10-year decline in the number of visitors to our beautiful, affordable state parks.

more visitors will also pump more money into our tourism industry. for families who love the outdoors, there's just no better deal around. now we've got to spread the word: if you like to kayak or fish, bird-watch or mountain bike, come to missouri first. missouri's land has always been the foundation of our economy. our farmers have fed the nation, and they can feed a hungry world. in a global marketplace, the demand for missouri agricultural products is primed to expand exponentially. we've got to sell globally, and buy locally. this year, we'll sell a record amount of corn and soybeans to taiwan. that's good for our trade balance and good for our

farmers. here at home, every missouri family should be able to share the bounty of the land, including fresh, healthy produce. that's why my budget will help promote local farmers markets, and encourage more folks to start community gardens in their neighborhoods. i've focused this evening on our shared obligations: creating jobs, managing the budget and holding down taxes. i've talked about working together to make our communities safer, stronger and healthier. i've talked about making strategic, long-term investments in missouri's future. but we have one more piece of

unfinished business, ethics. it's time we gave the people of missouri a state government that's as honest and straight- shooting as they are. last year, we demolished the patronage system long-used for awarding license fee offices. we created a more efficient system with a transparent bidding process. and it will produce revenue we can put to good use. two years ago, the legislature passed a bill to pay for college for the families of veterans killed or seriously disabled in combat. there was just one problem, and no funding. last year, the legislature passed a bill to pay a survivors' benefit to the families of firefighters, police officers, state troopers and sheriff's deputies killed in the line of duty. there was the same problem. numbers lending.

-- no funding. with the $800,000 our new fee office system will produce, we can finally do right by these heroes and their families, and fund both of these programs this year. good government really does pay dividends. and we can do more. we can pass meaningful ethics reform this year. there are a number of good reform proposals out there. but to my mind, meaningful ethics reform must do four basic things: stop the sneaky, back-door donations from committee-to- committee. ban one officeholder from working as a political consultant for another officeholder.

shut the revolving door between the legislature and lobbyists, for good. and most importantly, set strict limits on campaign contributions. missouri voters overwhelmingly mandated them. as attorney general, i fought for them. u.s. supreme court upheld them. it's the right thing to do. . .

they are anxious about retirement and what, if anything will be left for their kids and grandkids. not once, not one single time, did i hear anyone say anyon"poor me". times may be tough but missourians are tougher. [applause] remember the lesson of the ice storm. our greatest strength lies in one another. if we can hang tough a little

longer, work together, and stay on the path, we are going to keep climbing and climbing and climbing until we see the bright horizon. because missouri's's future is bright. even now there are glimmers of recovery. some parts of our economy like health care and technology are starting to hire again. home sales and industrial production are beginning to tick upward. consumers are cautiously starting to spend. these first warm rays of recovery are a sign that our discipline and hard work of the last year are paying off for the people of missouri. and at the end of the day, whether we the red, blue, or purple, most of us want the same things. a state that is competitive and prosperous. a state where hard-working people can find a decent job, buy a house, and raise a family.

a state brimming with opportunity, sort children can sink roots and raise families of their own. a state where health care is abundant and affordable. a state where every child gets a first-rate education. a state whose natural beauty beckons us to hike and bike, hunt and fish. and the state where neighbors help neighbors. do we have hard work ahead of us? yes, we do. will we make progress this year? >> yes, we will. can we move faster if we work together? absolutely. [applause] so tonight, let's swear an oath, to the people of the state we

love and to each other that nothing will stand in the way of rebuilding our economy and bring imagining our future. let's make 2010 the year we put politics second, and put missouri first. thank you. and god bless missouri. [applause] >> president obama is in ohio today and he hosted a town hall meeting in the county of lorraine at the local community college while there. the focus was jobs, the economy, and health care. if you miss any of this event, will have it for you tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c- span. wednesday, president obama delivers his first state of the union address to congress, laying out his vision for the future of the country and his plan to deal with issues such as unemployment, health care, and the wars in iraq and afghanistan. the state of the union address, wednesday night, our coverage starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

you can also listen to the president's address live on their iphone with the c-span radio app. each year the washington center brings thousands of students to washington, d.c. to experience the workings of our government firsthand. this weekend, they will discuss politics, government, and their futures. "q&a" cited night at 8 on c- span. >> this weekend on the communicators, former senator and now head of the national association of broadcasters gordon smith on the sec -- fcc plan to expand the broadcast spectrum and what it might mean for broadcasters. saturday on c-span. now today's state department briefing. topics included relief efforts in haiti and u.s. relations with yemen. also, secretary of state clinton's recent remarks calling for china to reveal the bulls allegations that government sentience ship -- 's allegations about censorship.

he spoke for an hour. >> i am try to get toing to getc ross down here. i'm delighted to have an opportunity to do that. he will be accompanied by fema administrator craig fugate. dr. shaw will be getting his second firsthand look at the u.s. operations there. he will meet with haitian officials as they did last saturday as well as the national partners and relief organizations to ensure if assistance is effectively coordinated on the ground. he will depart for said d'amico tonight and tomorrow morning, he will take military transport into haiti and among other

things, plan to attend the funeral of the archbishop of for grins. -- port-au-prince. and early today, the united states ambassador ken merton and the secretary-general in haiti signed a statement of principles on field coordination between the u.s. in haiti. the u.s. government has the haitian earthquake response continues. the statement re reaffirms the primary responsibility of he before the response but notes the scale of the disaster and the urgency of the humanitarian relief requires a comprehensive and coordinated international response. the un is coordinating the international response consistent with its mandate as established by the united nations security council and the

united states will continue to assist the people and government of haiti in every way that we can. ambassador kenneth martin for the united states and edward mulet. >> who from the haitian government signed that? >> it was a statement of principles between the haitians and the u.s. government on how we will cooperate on the ground in haiti. >> is there a country? >> i said it. >> is there an official? >> no. >> why do you need such an agreement between the u.s. government and the united nations on how you can cooperate? >> we have been working on arrangements and coordination regarding -- the un has joined the process through which on a

daily basis we coordinate flights in and out of the airport of port-au-prince going forward. questions regarding security arrangements between [unintelligible] which has prime responsibility for law and order in haiti along with the haitian national police and to to the extent that you have u.s. military forces on the ground that will participate in a convoy as they are moving in haiti, there are a lot of ways in which we want to outline how from a practical standpoint the un and the u.s. will work together for the benefit of the people and government of haiti. >> you said, i think he said, the primary responsibility for this lies in the government of haiti. >> that is true. >> how was that the u.s. and u.n. sign off on something like this? >> it is a statement of principles in how the united states and the u.s. will interact in support of the

government of haiti. >> can you repeat the part -- the responsibility of delivering aid is the haitian government? could you repeat that part to clarify? >> the primary responsibility is for the response to the earthquake. recognizing that right now, the government of haiti is in fact relying on the united nations, the u.s., the national committee to provide a significant amount of assistance to the kinds of things on behalf of the haitian government that it would normally -- >> not denying the haitians are directing the priorities and what they want to see done. how can you put that responsibility on them? >> it is their country. >> they are completely ill- equipped to assume this responsibility.

all they're basically doing is telling you what they need done. they're not delivering any services. how can it be their responsibility? >> that is a sweeping statement. >> it is clear on the ground that the government is ill- equipped to handle and the delivery of services. they're not able to deliver that many services before the quake. i am just saying. it is their country, obviously. they are a sovereign country and you are working with the government on what their priorities are. but to place the responsibility on the haitian government, don't you think that is high expectations? >> the responsibility is the haitian government as sovereign in this country. clearly, the haitian government is relying on the united states, the united nations, and the national committee -- international community to direct, and ongoing support to the people of haiti and to the

citizens of other countries who are in haiti. it is the responsibility of the government of haiti to set this priorities and as we in turn work with haiti to restore the capacity were over time, it will maintain its responsibility but be able to increasingly provide services to their own people. >> i think i a understand what you said so far. what i do not understand is why, given what you said, the government of haiti is not a participant or a signatory to the statement of principles and i would ask, obviously it is not. did you consult with them about what you in the u.s. were going to do? do they know about this? oe al-udeid? >> i would characterize it this way.

the united states, the united nations, the governor of pity, officials are in continual contact but for those who were with us last saturday in port- au-prince, one of the challenges was to make sure that we were coordinated. we understood who have specific responsibilities. who played the leadership role in peace together kinds of functions. the statement of principles, since part of the broader effort to make sure that there is effective coordination, this is not in my mind, any different than what we are doing in other parts of the world where the un has authority under a un security council mandate. and yet, we're significantly involved. you work through very specific

arrangements and these principles will guide how the united states and how the united nations will interact and coordinate and function on behalf of the government of haiti. and under its leadership. >> is there a security council resolution or some kind of resolution that states clearly that the u.s. and the un are carrying out these duties on behalf of the haitians? >> there has been such a resolution by the unit nations. and the united nations has a current appeal on going to make sure that we have significant international support for haiti. as you have that support going forward, you want to be able to coordinate effectively to make sure that the resources that the

international community is providing is effectively used and employed for the greatest benefit on the ground. i do not see this as being a whole lot different in what we're doing in afghanistan. what we have done in iraq and other places around the world. >> [inaudible] the local government was involved. for the haitians consulted, were they even -- were the haitians consulted and were they aware? >> they were consulted and and i know they were aware. >> [inaudible] [unintelligible] we will release the document. >hang on a second. just to a couple of more items to start off. you observed a short time ago

u.s. secretary of state clinton and [unintelligible] conducted a bilateral and presided over a signing ceremony on a five-year economic development agreement between moldova and the millennium challenge corporation. the compact includes a major agricultural and transportation projects. one change in the secretary schedule this afternoon. she was looking forward to welcoming the for minister of canada. that has turned into a phone conversation since his flight was canceled this morning. he was unable to get here. they look forward to conversing on the phone this afternoon. the secretary will be in montreal on monday for the preliminary meeting that will lead to the conference on haiti.

the meeting on monday will go through a number of things, starting to outline heavy's -- haiti's long-term requirements and participation in that effort. >> his plane was cancelled? >> his flight was canceled. >> they could not make it? >> i will leave it to your colleagues in ottawa. >> he does not have access to a government plane? >> i will leave that to my counterpart in ottawa. i am sure very economically so. the secretary will meet for the first time this afternoon with unesco -- the unesco director- general. this will be her first visit to the u.s. in her new capacity. it will discuss unesco's

engagement on issues such as haiti, and promoting gender equality in education and science and promoting freedom of the press. honduras -- we welcome to the defect a leader's decision -- the facdoe facto leaders decisin to step down. we note that important work needs to be established to reestablish order and we continue, we will work with the new government in honduras on for implementation of the courts. george mitchell met today with president abbas in ramallah.

he will meet with palestinian -- the palestinian prime minister tomorrow. he may have additional meetings before coming back to the united states. >> do you mind if we go back to haiti by way of china? >> are we going east or west? >> picking up, the chinese foreign ministry's statement is pointed. last week, senior u.s. officials indicated that a diplomatic demarche against china may be in the works. the indicated the u.s. wanted to see what the chinese said in response to secretary clinton speech. we know thewhat the chinese said. is a demarche still on the cards? >> "the washington post" said

that a demarche had been issued. we want to know. >> let's see. we have taken note of the chinese statement. it was a written statement put out by the foreign ministry. in fact, we have had conversations over the past 24 hours with the ambassador here in washington regarding the speech. regarding the issue of the goal -- google situation and broader aspects of our relationship. i would anticipate we would have ongoing meetings in washington and in beijing on all these subjects. i know you are asking about

this. we have a wide ranging and deep relationship with china. the number one and number two economies in the world are going to need to consult on a regular basis tand we have a number of shared interests. that does not mean that we look at situations, whether they are north korea, where there is a convergence of views on the current situation or iran where there's not convergence of views at the present time. >> you said yesterday you were unified on iran. >> there is a recognition that the implications of a nuclear power in the middle east will affect not only the immediate

countries, but also the world more broadly. >> [inaudible] >> the idea that you could keep the situation at arm's length and have not affected is not correct. the middle east will have ramifications and ripple effects. as the secretary mentioned in a q&a with you yesterday, that can have significant impact on energy markets worldwide and that is going to have an impact on the people of china. we will continue our discussions with the government of china on this issue. and we have our range of tools that our disposal that we will

use to be able to communicate. we view this seriously and we have expectations on what we want to see china do. based on their response, we will take appropriate action. >> [inaudible] >> the second thing on this. the chinese foreign ministry statement was in writing and that is something they presumably considered and i assume they go through their clearance process just like the state department. they said this did relationship is hurt by the secretaries allegations -- this deeper relationship is heard by the secretary's allegations. do you think it has been hurt? >> we have serious concerns about what has happened. we have serious concerns that someone in china has targeted

human rights activists. that someone in china has attacked -- hacked into and had an impact in terms of the commercial relationship between google and china. so it is a serious issue. it is a longstanding issue between the united states and china. we will continue to talk about this. what will be the impact? that will depend on the response. >> the response here -- let me read it. the u.s. has criticized chinese policies to administrate the internet and in insinuates that china restricts internet freedom. this runs counter to the facts and is harmful to relations. do you concur with either of those statements?

that it runs contrary to the facts and that is harmful -- is harmful to u.s.-chinese relations? we seek an explanation from china. we're trying to ascertain facts. the chinese have denied that anything has happened. the google statement speaks for itself. seems to point to the fact that something significant has happened. that is why we have raised the question that we have and why we seek an explanation from china of whether that happened. we're trying to ascertain the facts. blanket denial that nothing happened we do not think is particularly helpful. >> [inaudible] whether you concur with the chinese statements.

you did not say we stand up precisely for what secretary clinton said. the first thing was it runs contrary to the facts and you did not say we stand by her comments and we do not think they -- >> i did not think the secretary's comments were in doubt. we do stand by the secretary. >> you said harmful to the relationship. >> that is a difficult one to answer because the process through which we will evaluate what has happened and judge accordingly, that process is still ongoing. we think that we have a broad relationship with china. we think that is far more stable that has been in some time. that said, we have our range of issues where we have

disagreements. i do not think we are currently on the same page in terms of what happened in this case for its ramifications. that is why we have done exactly what we have done. it is why the secretary said this incident raises serious questions and we seek an explanation. it is why we have had multiple meetings including one last evening with china on this subject. and why we will continue to talk to them and seek an explanation and -- as part of a transparent process. as we go through this, we will assess their reputations and so will a company like google in terms of how it evaluates the value for the presence in china. >>i would just say this is an

issue that will remain under discussion. it is hard to evaluate at this point. this by itself is not unusual. we have quite honest and frank discussions with our chinese interlocutors all the time. we're prepared to work through this issue as long as we think that the discussion is conducted in good faith and within the context of a broadly constructive and deep relationships. >> you that the ambassador -- met the ambassador -- >> can you talk about meetings held in beijing? at what level? is this ambassadorial, at the

secretarial level, at the economic level? >> since this episode came to light, most discussions have been here in washington. they have been at the ambassadorial level with the range of officials across the u.s. government. and so it is at a high level that reflects our concern about what has transpired and i think we will have further discussions about this in the coming days. >> can you be more specific about who and how many meetings there have been? >> multiple. >> 3, 5, 10? >> [inaudible] >> 3 that i am aware of. >> at the highest level? >> pretty soon there will be a fourth and fifth. >> since this came up, there has

been three meetings in washington between -- >> yes. >> it was not with the ambassador. >> i did not say it was. there have been assistant secretaries involved and ambassadors involved. >> which assistant secretaries? >> kurt kemp. >> [inaudible] >> what about posner? >> no. >> [inaudible] guest>> all i am prepared to sas that we are having a high-level meetings and will continue to have meetings and we will continue to press this issue aggressively. we will continue to seek an explanation from china.

it is a serious issue. i cannot characterize right now what impact it has beyond the immediate term. it will depend on answers to the questions we have poes. >> can you describe the tone or the substance? >> we always have frank discussions with chinese interlocutors. >> you said assistant secretaries. was there an assistant secretary who met with the chinese? >> i was not there so i do not want to leave anybody out. from the state department standpoint, not in the meeting. >> [inaudible] was the deputy secretary involved? >> [unintelligible]

>> was google discussed or was it a broader -- >> they were both discussed. >> [inaudible] >> could you give us an update on american fatalities in haiti? >> we will run through a number. as of 5:00 this morning, just under 9002 ordered 88 americans and family members -- 9822 americans and family members have departed. >> what does americans and family members mean? >> in some cases you have family that might have one parent and child who is an

american citizen. the parent and child to our haitian citizens -- who are haitian citizens. we have granted visas to keep families together. we have opened files or accounted for roughly 11,000 americans at this point. we have 46 confirmed american fatalities, one u.s. government officer, as you know and 45 private. at this point, we estimate that there are perhaps 24 other cases unconfirmed fatalities that we're still investigating. >> including those three embassy employees that were suggested

earlier in the wake? >> we still have four u.s. government individuals who are unaccounted for. >> [inaudible] >> i do not think so. they're unaccounted for. there are 24 cases where we are aware there has been a death and we're trying to make sure we match up identity and citizenship. >> how many are unresolved? >> that is a good question. we will try to find out what the broad universe is. i think we still are running at 4000 or 5000. that are kind of still looking at evaluating information. >> about the fatalities, a

couple things. if you have four or five or 6000, that does not mean there were killed. at some point, you have 24 that are presumed dead. presumably, some of those 4500 possibly could also be deceased. >> i said 4000 to 5000. >> she said you had -- you said you had 4000 or 5000 unresolved. presumably some of those people might have also died. >> i think we do not doubt tragically -- we are aware, we believe up to 70 americans who have died in the earthquake.

that number is going to go up. once we're in the recovery phase we will deal with the rubble on the ground. no doubt we're going to find more bodies that have already been discovered and a number of those will be american. >> i guess -- one to have the recovery phase, does not sound like there is as much attention to specific bodies and people are being dumped into mass graves. >> i would not characterize it that way. in the recovery phase, we are -- we will be looking to recover remains. that will be important. as we go port-au-prince -- go

through port-au-prince. that will be the next phase and something that we will do in a broader scale and with the urgency and sensitivity. this is the next day giant terms of helping -- the next stage in terms of helping haiti. we will change our methodology but obviously, we think this is important to families in haiti, families in the u.s. and families in other countries. they ultimately understand that to the extent we can, what happened to their loved ones. >> can you walk as through these confirmed fatalities? how do you go about confirming an american fatality and went to confirm that, do you only confirm them once you actually

have found their remains and what happens to their remains? are you sending them home to the u.s., what are you doing with them? >> it is very difficult to make a general statement. in terms of confirmation, that an american has died overseas, we would be aware that there is a body. we take every effort to match that through identity papers including passports that would allow us to verify citizenship. we work with families of those who are deceased. in some cases, they have family members who are in haiti and in some cases, we have helped facilitate the return of remains. families have gone ahead and

brought remains back to the united states through private efforts. it is a combination of those. i think we recognize the part of our responsibility here to determine as best we can the disposition of americans who were in port-au-prince and will continue to do that. >> on notification of next of kin, have you notified the next of kin of all these americans? >> if we have that confirmation, and we reject families, -- reach out to families or those who have contacted us, i would say in some cases, the u.s. government has directly notify people that their loved ones have been lost in haiti and in other cases we have notified families and friends and they have notified next of kin.

we have been and continue to be in contact with anyone who has asked us for assistance with determining what has happened two people in port-au-prince. -- to people in port-au-prince. >> [inaudible] >> there will be a decision made by the government of haiti. we will consult on what we are doing on the search and rescue effort and we still have a teams that are looking at particular sites around port-au-prince as we speak. i do not think the names -- numbers have changed over the last 24 hours. there are 122 people rescued and 43 have been rescued by one of the six u.s. teams on the ground working heroically for the past

10 days. those teams are from fairfax virginia, los angeles, and miami dade county. they continue their work and they have listening devices and dogs and continue to search. we do recognize that whatever that golden window, we are in a tan. i do not think we have seen any change on the ground in the last 24 hours. -the government of haiti will signal if there is an end to the recovery phase. >> some people are saying that there is not enough heavy machinery to dig out into the rubble to dig deep into the concrete. it does not seem that you plan

on bringing in more equipment. >> what ever has to be done during this next phase, some of that equipment may need to be brought in. you're right. the next phase will involve moving significant debris in order to be able to recover remains of those who might have been lost. >> are search and rescue teams continuing to look for people that are still in the rubble including american students and professors? >> there are search and rescue teams continuing to operate at the hotel montana. >> can you talk about -- some people on the ground are saying that there is political

decisions being made on search and rescue based on nationality. can you discriminate in terms of search and rescue? >>people are asking. would you rather i just say that not give you a chance -- >> the earthquake happened january 12. within 24 hours, we had a disaster assistance response team on the ground at the moment they hit the ground they started to assess where should the search and rescue teams go first. the teams arrived late on wednesday night. there were beginning search and rescue operations at first light on thursday, january 14.

from that point on, the number on the ground has grown to where it is now, 43 teams. and they have been working 24 hours a day. since then. they have achieved from results. 122 is a remarkable number. they have been guided by through their various means, listening devices they have, trained dogs they bring, where there are active signs of life. we have concentrated on the hotel christopher where we knew there was a substantial number of un personnel and the hotel montana, we know there were substantial numbers of people trapped. they have gone and been guided where they see signs of life.

they have had remarkable successes but they have concentrated where they know the greatest potential for rescuing people, the kinds of facilities where large numbers were known to have congregated, were known to have been there when the earthquake struck. that has guided us. i'm not aware that politics has entered into this by any stretch of the imagination. >> secretary gates was in india and then he went to pakistan and afghanistan. in india, they are on high alert and in pakistan he said pakistan is not doing enough. [unintelligible] in washington, there are more

pakistani. there is a statement that [unintelligible] >> i probably would challenge the facts behind your question but i would defer to the fbi in terms of the ongoing interaction it is having with the pakistan- american community. i do not think you have that question right. secretary gates and secretary clinton and others, we continue to have significant dialogue with the government of pakistan. the government of india, the government of afghanistan. about how we can have stability , dialogue, and cooperation

across the region. that is ultimately how jointly these countries together with the u.s. will be able to stabilize the region and the fate and deter political extremists who threaten in different ways all three countries. this is a common challenge and it is part of our ongoing dialogue with all theithree of e countries. >> the indian government put out some warnings about potential hijackings in the country. i was wondering if you had information. >> i do not. i will defer to the department of homeland security. >> the taiwanese airport has been -- [unintelligible]

can you elaborate on the reason for allowing this mission? >[unintelligible] china appears not so happy about it. can you comment? >> he will transit on route to central america next week. he will also transmit the united states when returning from central america. we approved his request based on longstanding practice. our decision is consistent with the unofficial nature of our relations with taiwan in keeping with the criteria of safety, comfort, convenience, and dignity of trouble. i think he will transit san francisco on route to central america and los angeles by

returning to taipei. i believe we have allowed a c- 130 which has been participating in the rescue operations in haiti to refuel here and that is consistent with our philosophy and also given the importance of supporting the operation in haiti. >> about the first lady? >> as to who is traveling with the president [unintelligible] >> where is he going? >> he is going to central america but has specific schedule -- >> san francisco was not exactly a direct line between taiwan and central america. why san francisco? >> he requested permission to make the transit. we have granted it as we have in the past. >> is he going to speak?

>> i do not believe he has any public [unintelligible] >> is anyone meeting him there? >> i do not know. >> dhs? >> i do know. raymond f. burkhardt, will greet him in san francisco and los angeles. >>ion his itinerary, we will der to taiwan. >> [inaudible] said yesterday that the movement and its present were threatened -- president were threatened [unintelligible]

do you have reaction? >> can you start again? >> the deputy head of fatah has said the movement and mud abbas were threatened by the u.s. -- mahmoud abbas were threatened by the u.s. boycott [unintelligible] >> our policy on this is clear. we would like to see a stronger palestinian government that has greater capacity to serve the needs of the palestinian people. we support the prime minister in his efforts to build stronger institutions and to continue to grow the palestinian economy and to professionalize the palestinian and security forces. if others want to join this

effort, they know what they have to do. and the existing palestinian authority is guided by the principles and we will continue to support any effort towards reconciliation that is guided by these principles, including recognition of israel and support of existing agreements. and choosing to join the political process rather than choosing to exercise violence in pursuit of their political objectives. that is why george mitchell is in the region and why we continue to have discussions with the palestinians. >> he was going to have other

talks? >> he may have other discussions. i think his schedule after tomorrow is flexible. we will talk to that on monday. >> after tomorrow, he will be in israel? >> he made make other stops before he comes back. >> do you have an update on the number of orphans [inaudible] >any updates on procedures? >> so far, it is a moving number. roughly 400 humanitarian pearls have been granted for orphans. -- paroles have been granted for orphans. >> indian students or indians

living there are [unintelligible] the australian government is not doing anything or much. anything you may have -- >> we support human rights anywhere in the world but asking the particulars of that situation, i will defer to australia. >> what do you expect concretely from the london meeting next week? concrete results? >> on the yemen meeting in london? >> what do you expect concrete lead from tly from the meeting?

>> we look for consolidating international support for yemen. we will coordinate our assistant efforts and we hope to reach agreement on assisting young men with its political and economic reformy economic -- yemen owith its political and economic reform. i think this is bringing together a wide range of leaders, those who have a direct interest in the future of yemen. many from the region. it will be outlined, the specific require -- needs and

what you yemen's plans are. simply to outline what we think the significance requirement that yemen has to stabilize and help deal with the conflicts within its borders and also the threat posed by al qaeda. >> the yemen foreign minister was adamant that there were not enough reforms taking place. he said that money had been forthcoming and the mechanism was broken and basically it is all your fault. >> i would not characterize him saying it that way. >> he said it was everyone else's fault but there's. you agree? >> one of the things he said in a meeting was one of the

criticism was is there was a significant time lag from the time when ade was pledged at the time it got to the ground. this is something that the secretary has responded to in other contexts. we will work with young men to identify -- yemen to identify its requirements. we are raising its expectations. we are recognizing that the solutions to the challenges that yemen faces on security fronts and the economic front has to be yemeni solutions. we will provide solutions and we can see hwhow we can speed up

decisions. there are a number of political and economic reforms that yemen has to achieve. >> do you agree the president has been courageous? >> the president has taken significant steps in tackling the extremist challenge that he faces. >> do you agree that the outside world is responsible for the fact that yemen has not reformed? >> i do not think we believe -- this is a shared responsibility. there are things that the government has to do to improve. >> you mean previously pledged assistance, the 2006 donors' conference. >> that is a very legitimate point for the yemeni government to raise. how can we get assistance on the ground and having the desired impact as rapidly as possible? we have to have that same

conversation with afghanistan and with pakistan. it is why the secretary is committed to trying to reform how we do assistance. but we are going to expect more from the government of yemen in terms of assistance and resolving the conflicts within its borders. they were trying to better understand the conflict with [unintelligible] and how yemen intends to resolve that. there are things we expect in terms of performance going forward.

>> thank you. > this is c-span, public affairs programming courtesy of america's cable companies. secretary of state hillary clinton speech on internet freedom. after that, today state department briefing on diplomatic efforts concerning worldwide internet access. .

hello, everybody. hello, ohio. thank you. please come and relax. [laughter] we are going to be here for a little bit. everybody take a seat if you have a seat. can anybody please give jodi a big round of applause for the introduction? [applause] everybody is a special guest, but we have a few that i just want to mention. first of all, obviously, you have with the fine as governors in the country.

my former colleague said no one fights harder for work then sharod brown. give him a big round of applause. you have a dynamite pair. people are so committed to their district and the state. i have been having just a wonderful time here in town. your mayor has just been a really nice person.

[cheers] she and i shared a burger. please, give him -- her a big round of applause. give a round of applause to your president, dr. ray church. listen,it's great to be here in elyria. it's always nice to get out of washington. arsenide's people in washington. it can drive you crazy.

am i wrong? privilege of traveling across this country, talking with folks like you about the challenges you face in your own lives, and together as a nation. the single hardest thing about being is that it is harder for me to be able to do that these days. it did that give me wrong. you live above the store. i have a short commute.

i see my children before they go to work. that makes everything so much better. but the truth is, being president is also a little confining. i cannot discuss to the barber shop or sit at the diner. this is part of the reason why i taken to the practice of reading 10 late tears on the 40,000 i get every night. that is just so that i can stay in touch. nothing beats in the day i can make an escape. come out here and spend a day - to visit plants like emc precision machining and the community college. a day with all of you.

>> i love you. >> i love you back. thank you. [applause] >> let's be on this. -- honest. these are difficult and unsettling times here in elr yia, they are tough and ohio, they are tough across the country. i walked into office a year ago in the middle of a raging economic storm that was wreaking devastation on your town and communities everywhere. we had to take some difficult steps to deal with that mess, to stave off an even greater economic catastrophe. we had to stabilize the big banks, which, given their role in creating this mess, was a

tough pill to swallow. i knew it would be unpopular - and rightly so. but i also knew that we had to do it because if they went down, your local banks would have gone down, too. if the financial system had gone down, it would have taken the entire economy and millions more families and businesses with it. we would have been looking at a second great depression. in my first months in office, we also helped save two of the big three automakers from collapse. some people weren't happy about that, either. they felt that if you make a bad decision, you ought to reap the consequences, just like any business would. but if we had let gm and chrysler simply go under, hundreds of thousands of americans would have been hurt, not just at those companies themselves, but at other auto companies and at their suppliers and dealers, here in ohio, up in

michigan, and all across this country. so, we said, if you're willing to take the tough and painful steps to make yourselves more competitive, we're willing to invest in your future. and earlier this week, we heard that the auto industry planned to make almost 3 million cars and trucks here in north america in the next three months - up 69% from the first three months of 2009. we also passed a recovery act to pull our economy back from the brink. there has been a misunderstanding about the recovery act. if you ask the average person, if they would say it was the bank bailout. let me just be clear here. the recovery act -- tax cuts for working families and 7 different

tax cuts for small businesses so they can start up, and grow, and hire. unemployment insurance. we made cobra cheaper. we gave aid to states to help them through these tough times. we made the largest investment in infrastructure since the done.

storm has passed. but families like yours and communities like elyria are still reeling from the devastation left in its wake. folks have seen jobs you thought would last forever disappear. they can do things that cannot be shipped off to china comic as they are so attuned to their customers' needs. they have 77 employees. now they have 44. they want to start hiring back. it is going to take a little time. they are starting to see orders pick up just a little bit. it is tough. businesses shut down. i've heard about how the city government here is bare bones.

go buy groceries like you used to because of cuts in the county transit system. toughest decades our middle class has faced in generations. this has been a decade where pedaled faster and faster, only to find themselves stuck in the behind. the average income actually flat lines, in some cases went down. that is before the crisis. for many of you,even as you've found your paychecks shrinking, even as you've found the value of your biggest asset - your home - falling, the cost of everything has gone up.

the cost of groceries. the cost of sending your kids tothe cost of saving for retirement. faced is the breakneck, the health care you need. i didn't run for president to turn away from these challenges. i didn't run for president to kick them down the road. them - once and for all. i ran for this office to rebuild our economy so it works not just for a fortunate few, but for hardworking people in this country.

to create good jobs that can rising. to improve the quality of america's schools and lift up great community colleges like this, which are so important to our future. to make that higher education affordable for the children of insurance costs that are breaking our national budget. took on health care. i have no illusions that this is going to be hard. seven presidents and congresses

have tried it. all of them failed. . i had political adviser to limit this may now be the smartest thing to do. you have a lot on your plate. it is the biggest economic crisis since the great depression. , two wars. you may not get a lot of cooperation. you get pushed back from the drug companies. it is complicated. do not do it. we do not do it. i knew interest premiums have more than doubled in the gnostic a. i knew that out of pocket expenses had skyrocket. i knew that millions more people have lost their insurance and that it would only get worse.

when you lose 7 million jobs, what do you happen to those folks withheld insurance? what happens when there cobra runs out? i took this up because i want to ease the burdens on all the families and small businesses outrageous rates. targeted by the worst practices of the insurance industry. all i think about is how we are going to create jobs in this area. all right thing about is how we get banks lending again. i have been doing that the

entire year. what i also know is that healthcare is part of the drug on the economy. it is part of the eroding security that american middle- class family still. now, we've gotten pretty far buzz saw along the way. the long process of getting -- this is what happens in congress. you are rennie handling into special interests and armies of lobbyists, and artists and politics.

getting things done. and the longer it's taken, the uglier the process has looked. i understand why people are not so sure about this, even though they know that what they got is not working. people in washington were in a tizzy try to figure out what this means for help reform. what does this mean for obama? how is he going to survive this? that is what they do. the one to to understand that this is not about me.

[applause] this is not about me. it's about you. i didn't take up this issue to boost my poll numbers or score. the way to boost your poll numbers is not to do anything. you do not do anybody. i had real high poll numbers. all of washington would be seen, what a genius? i did not take this on to score political points. you know what? i think that i win when you win. that is how i think about it. [applause]

if i would have taken the path of least resistance, i would have done something easier. no, i'm trying to solve the face every day. just because it's hard. we're going to keep on working to get this done with democrats, republicans - anyone who is willing to step up. because i am not going to watch more people get crushed by costs, or denied the care they need by insurance company power in washington.

fighting for you. i'll take my lumps, too. i'll never stop fighting to bring jobs back to elyria. i'll never stop fighting for an rewarded, where responsibility is honored, where accountability. alan not stop fighting until we have jobs for everybody. congress to pass a jobs bill to put more americans to work rebuilding roads and railways, businesses for hiring people, and to offer families an give rise to a clean energy economy.

if we have not done anything with the recovery act, people that are building solar panels would settle to their industry was about to collapse and credit had frozen. now there is some of the highest states that have received funds than anybody. -- on most of the $5 million of our investment went to a plant right here rightelyria. it is helped producing the car batteries of the future. that is what we will keep funding for the rest in 2010. -- and so we have this country

working again. i will never stop fighting for policies that will help restore home values, to redeem the investment the folks that made. it is still tough out there. we will have to do more to make sure that banks are responsive to folks who are working and paying their mortgage i am not going to stop fighting to give up our kids the best education. -- to take the tens of billions of dollars to invest money and students of action amend the -- needed. we do not need the middleman. cut them out.

every american a fair shake. that's why the very first bill i signed into law was the lilly ledbetter act to uphold the work for men and women alike. many families need two paychecks to get by. so long as i'm president, i'll never stop fighting to protect you from the kind of deceptive practices we've seen from some protect you from surprise charges, retroactive rate hikes, and other unfair rules. against those hidden overdraft or more. up government.

this is hard to do. we do not control every branch. any administration in history. this is the first illustration where all of you can find out who it is the white house. it is the first time in history. that is just one example of how we are trying to open up the process i will not stop fighting to cut the abuse in washington. we will rein in exploding deficits. i am going to keep on fighting

for real, meaningful health insurance reform. we expanded the children's health insurance program to include 4 million kids. we are needed that. we will fight to hold the insurance company accountable. i want to make sure it that people who did not have health care get it. it is shameful that we do not do that. i will not win every round. saving their skin in a time of need. we want our money back.

we want our money back. we will get it back, each and every dime. when we start on regulatory reform, trying to change the rules to prevent what had caused so much heartache across the country, there are people who will say "why is he meddling in government?" it is another example of obama being the big government. i just want to add some rules in place so that when these guys make dumb decisions you do not have to foot the bill. i do not mind having that fight. i said at the beginning hamas this means to me to be able to

travel. that is true now more than ever. there is no doubt that it is easy to get it in washington. there are guys creating folks are raising their kids and working hard. i am reminded of the strength and resilience of the american people. i am reminded of the fundamental character of the americans that i am so privileged to serve. it is rare for them what we are going through right now. it will carry us through this to better days ahead.

i am confident of that. i am very grateful. thank you. thank you. thank you. let's take some questions. you guys -- everybody, sit down, sit back down. all right. so i'm just going to call on people. we're going to do girl-boy-girl- boy so that there's no accusations of bias. but we'll try to get as many questions in as we can. all right, this young lady right back here. yes, you. there should be a microphone -- wait till the mic comes so everybody can hear you.

oh, i'm sorry -- that's okay, i'll call on you next. well, one of you ask your question. >> thank you, mr. president. it's an honor to be here with you today. i work here in lccc's financial services office. i am proud to be part of finding pathways for students who attend college. i feel that a college education is a lifeline to the future of our citizens. we greatly appreciate the increase in the pell grant, which allowed our neediest students to access a college education. it increased buying power as college costs continue to rise. my question to you is, will your administration support continued increases to the pell grant so that our neediest students have access to higher education?

>> the answer is yes. i want everybody to understand, we made -- and this was the help -- with the help of the members of congress who are here -- made an enormous investment in higher education, making sure that young people could afford to go to great institutions like this. so we significantly increased the level of each pell grant, that we could have more pell grants. now, we want to continue to do this. i mentioned during my formal remarks the fact that a lot of banks and financial institutions are still serving as middlemen in the financial aid process, and they take out several billions dollars' worth of profits from that. it turns out that actually it can be administered in such a way where these loans go directly to the students. and if you do that, then you're saving several billion dollars

that can then be put back into the system. we want to get that finalized; we want to get that done. that will be an enormous boost. now, one thing i have to say, though. even as we put more money into the student loan program, we are also trying to reach out to university presidents and administrators to figure out how can we reduce the inflation in higher education -- because the fact is, is that the only thing that has gone up faster in cost than health care is -- guess what. higher education. and the problem is, if we're not thinking about ways to curve the inflation, then even if we put more money in, what that money is buying becomes less and less. and so trying to find creative ways for universities to do more with less is going to be important.

now, in fairness to universities and colleges, part of the reason they've been having to jack up their costs is they used to get more support from the state. state budgets got into a hole, and then it became harder, and so they had to make it up on the tuition side. nevertheless, what is also true, though, is just their general costs of operating have gone up in ways that i think we can improve. so we're going to be working on that as well. all right? okay, i've got to call a gentleman, then i got to go back to you because you thought that i called you and i feel bad. all right. this gentleman right here in the tie. yes, you look sharp. >> mr. president, thank you. it's an honor to stand before you. thank you.

earlier in your message, you mentioned our transit system. obviously we do need help and we're in dire need to have some assistance there. but what i didn't hear in anything is your interest in our steel mill. that's a big part of our community and we desperately need help there as well. we just wondered where washington's stance is on our steel mill. thank you. >> well, i was talking to your mayor about this. obviously he's a big advocate for manufacturing in the region. i do not have all the details in terms of what's happening at the steel mill at this moment. but what we've done is we've set up an office in the white house just focused on manufacturing -- because it's my view that america's got to make things. now, we're not going to make -- i want to be honest. not all the manufacturing jobs that have gone are going to come back. and if people tell you they are, that's just not true -- because a lot of that has moved to places where the wages are just much lower. and i know that some people say, well, then we should just set up tariffs so that folks can't ship them in. but these days the economy, the global economy is so interconnected that that's just

not a practical solution. the solution is to find -- and i don't know the details of the steel mill here -- but i know that the ones that have been successful, they do what emc is doing as well, which is you find what's the high- end market. what's the market that involves a lot of technology, specialization, highly trained workers, quick turnarounds to spec so that the customers really feel like they're getting something special and different -- that's how you compete, because that's something that a steel mill in china or in brazil can't do. they can't compete with you being on the spot working closely with customers. so finding ways to develop specialty steels and so forth, that's going to be the key. our manufacturing office will be working with folks here in town to see what we can do. all right? thank you. all right, back to this young lady here.

>> first i want to start by saying that i am very grateful to be here to meet you in person. i absolutely support you and back you. i feel like rome wasn't built in a day, and i know that everybody is really impatient, but i know that with time things can be turned around. and i believe that your intentions are really honorable in that. >> i appreciate it. >> i am a single mother of three, and i have two quick issues that are very important to me -- one being that i have a three- year-old, who has just turned three, who got lead poisoning last year and almost died. and i called everyone, including the epa of ohio, and i cannot seem to get any response to this. >> well, guess what. i guarantee you that somebody from the epa is going to call

you in about five minutes. [laughter] [applause] before you sit down, there's going to be a phone call from the epa. all joking aside -- and i know you have a second question, but i just want to focus on this -- lead poisoning, a lot of it from lead paint, from older homes all across the country and all across the midwest is something that we have to be more aggressive on. this is something that i worked on when i was a u.s. senator, when i was a state senator. i'm working on it as president, and i will find out directly from them how they can help not only with your particular situation but what we're doing in this area in terms of lead abatement. >> okay. >> okay? >> the second thing that i

wanted to address to you is the unfair labor laws that they seem to have in some of these industries as far as discrimination and different issues of that nature that don't seem to get addressed from the bigger companies. i have actually worked for ford -- i'm a full-time student now here at lc, gratefully -- and even when i was working there and i have -- my whole family has actually come up through ford -- and there's a lot of very unjust situations that come about, but no attorneys will deal with it, no one will talk about it, and it's always pushed under the rug. and i -- i do owe my -- what i have now to ford because it was what was bread and butter for my family. but at the same time, it's not fair that even at this point my mother still can't retire, she has to continue to suffer. >> well, look, let me just say generally, one of the things that my administration has been able to do over the last year

that does not cost money is just enforcing laws that are on the books a little more aggressively, making sure -- i mentioned earlier equal pay for equal work. we are so past the point where it should be debatable that women get paid the same as men for doing the same job. and it is something that -- especially because there was a -- it was just released i think last week showing that increasingly the wives are making more than the husbands in some circumstances. and whoever is making more, you've got to have two paychecks. so this is not just a "feminist issue" -- you know, sometimes guys say, well, why do i -- why should i care about it?

well, let me tell you something. if your wife is getting paid fairly, that means your family is getting paid fairly. and i want my daughters to be treated the same way as your sons. that's something we shouldn't be arguing about anymore. all right, gentleman right back here. yes, it's a guy's turn. yes, sir. >> i'm an inventor, and i hold u. s. patent number 7,397,731. >> okay. >> and before i ask my question i'd like to make a sales pitch. if you can use my patent in your next election, i think you can raise a ton of money worldwide. you should take a look at it. >> all right, we'll take a look. all right. >> if you can't use it, the government could use it, and i

could build a multibillion- dollar business here in ohio. >> all right, we'll take a look at your patent. go ahead, what's your question? >> yes, okay, it has to do with international patent rights. with all this free trade and trade barriers falling, it's really hard for an individual like me with a global-scope patent to file all over the world and get patent protection everywhere, and having to go overseas to fight infringement. so if you're going to drop trade barriers, maybe you can extend my patent rights to the foreign countries. >> well, this is a great question, and this is a huge problem. look, our competitive advantage in the world is going to be people like this who are using their minds to create new products, new services. but that only helps us and helps you build a multibillion-

dollar company if somebody can't just steal that idea and suddenly start making it in indonesia or malaysia or bangladesh with very cheap workers. and one of the problems that we have had is insufficient protection for intellectual property rights. that's true in china; it's true for everything from bootleg dvds to very sophisticated software. and there's nothing wrong with other people using our technologies. we just want to make sure that it's licensed and you're getting paid. so i've given instructions to my trade offices -- and we actually highlight this at the highest levels of foreign policy -- that these are issues that have to be addressed because that's part

of the reciprocity of making our markets open. and so when i met with president hu of china, this is a topic that, at dinner, i directly brought up with him. and -- but as you point out, it's got to be sustained, because a lot of times they'll say, yes, yes, yes, but then there's no enforcement on their end. and one of the things that export arm of the u. s. government to help work with medium-sized businesses and small businesses, not just the big multinationals to protect their rights in some of these areas, because we need to boost exports. can i just say, we just went through a decade where we were told that it didn't matter, we'll just -- you just keep on importing, buying stuff from other countries, you just take out a home equity loan and max out your credit card, and everything is going to be okay. and it looked, for a lot of people, like, well, the economy

seems to be growing -- but it was all built on a house of cards. that's what we now know. and that's why if we're going to have a successful manufacturing sector, we've got to have successful exports. when i went and took this trip to china, and took this trip to asia, a lot of people said, "well, why is he going to asia? he's traveling overseas too much. he needs to be coming back home and talking about jobs." i'm there because that's where we're going to find those jobs, is by increasing our exports to those countries, the same way they've been doing in our country. if we increased our exports -- our share of exports by just 1 percent, that would mean hundreds of thousands of jobs here in the united states. five percent -- maybe a million jobs, well-paying jobs. so we're going to have to pry those markets open. intellectual property is part of that process.

all right, great question. it's a woman's turn now. you guys just put down your hands. oh, okay, well, this young lady right in front. we've got a microphone over here. you know, i would give it to you if i could reach, but -- go ahead. >> i introduce myself. i'm 83 years old. i know i don't look it. >> you don't. you don't. you look great. >> thank you. i'm very concerned about social security. i think there's a few here who are probably living on that or supplementing that. i understand that congress has given themselves a raise but has denied us cola for possibly the next three years. at the time of the h1n1 thing, people over 65 were not given

the right to have the shot. for some reason or other this health care crisis was left on our senior backs. what can we do about this? >> well, let me address all three of your issues, because you're raising actually three separate issues. first is how do we make sure that social security is sustainable over the long term. social security is one of our entitlement programs that for now is stable, but will not be if we don't make some changes. now, here's the good news. compared to medicare, social security is actually in reasonably good shape, and with some relatively small adjustments, you can have that solvent for a long time. so social security is going to be there. i know a lot of people are concerned about it. social security we can fix. now, in terms of the cola, the

formula -- cola stands for cost of living allowance, so it's put in place to make sure that social security is keeping up with inflation. here's the problem. this past year, because of the severity of the recession, we didn't have inflation; we actually had deflation. so prices actually fell last year. as a consequence, technically, seniors were not eligible for a cost of living adjustment, to have it go up because prices did not go up in the aggregate. that doesn't mean that individual folks weren't being pinched by higher heating prices or what have you, but on average prices went down. here's what we did. working with these key members of congress here, we did vote to

provide a $250 one-time payment to seniors, which, when you factored it in, amounted to about 1. 8 percent. so it was almost the equivalent of the cola, even though it wasn't actually the cola. so we didn't forget seniors. we never forget seniors because they vote at very high rates. not to mention you changed our diapers and things. and so we appreciate that. the third point that you made had to do with the h1n1 virus. the reason that seniors were not prioritized was because, unlike the seasonal flu shot, h1n1 was deadliest in young people and particularly children.

and because the virus came up fairly late in the time frame for preparing flu shots, we had a limited number of vaccines, and we had to decide who gets the vaccines first. now, by the way, let me just do a little psa here. anybody who has not gotten a h1n1 shot, along with their seasonal flu, i would still advise you to get it, because historically there are two waves of this. particularly make sure your kids have gotten it, because there have been a significantly higher number of children killed under h1 -- who get h1n1 than those who just get the seasonal flu. it's still a small fraction, i don't want to make everybody afraid. but it's just -- it's a little more serious than the normal seasonal flu. so it's not that seniors were neglected here. what happened was, according to the science, according to the cdc, it was determined that we had to go to the most

vulnerable groups the quickest, and that was children, particularly those who had underlying neurological disorders or immunity disorders. all right? we haven't forgotten about you. and you don't look 83. okay. this young man -- he's been standing up quite a long time. there you go. >> mr. president, my name is jordan brown. can you hear me? >> yes. >> okay. >> go ahead and give him the mic. i don't want to have him fall over there. >> okay. i don't have a question but i do want to know if i would like -- if i can shake your hand. >> well, yes, yes, you'll be able to come up here. if somebody lets you through, i'll definitely give you a handshake. all right, who -- i want to make sure -- you know, there's another young man here so i'll call on him. >> i'm 29 years old, and i've never had a job in my life. i went to jail when i was younger. it's like hard to get a job as a felon.

is this -- any programs that hire people with felonies like something that -- because it's sad, it's like -- 29 years old, i'm 29. >> all right. jerome -- >> and also i wanted to -- i'm a poet and i wrote a poem for you and i've been dying to put this poem in your hand. >> okay. give me the poem. first of all, it's never too late. it's never too late. one of these gentlemen here will hand this poem to me. there you go. i won't read it from the stage but -- because it's -- >> i'd appreciate it, later when you get back to the white house. >> but i will definitely think about it. look, i'm proud of the fact that you're bringing this up because there are people who've made

mistakes, particularly when they're young, and it is in all of our interests to help them redeem themselves and then get on a straight path. now, i don't blame employers obviously for being nervous about hiring somebody who has a record. it's natural if they've got a lot of applicants for every single job that that's a question that they'd have in their minds. on the other hand, i think one of the great things about america is we give people second chances. and so what we've tried to do -- and i want to say, this has been a bipartisan effort -- when i was in the senate, working with president, joe biden -- passing a second chance act that helps to fund programs that help the reintegration of ex-felons.

it's smart for us to do. you know, sometimes people say, well, that's just coddling people. no; you reduce the recidivism rate, they pay taxes, it ends up being smart for taxpayers to do. i don't know, jerome, what particular programs may exist in this county, but i promise you i'll find out. and we'll see if we can get you hooked up with one of them. all right? okay, right here. yes. no, no, no. right here. yes. go ahead. >> mr. president, i started a great lakes truck driving school in 2008 in lorain county. >> i'm sorry, what kind of school? >> great lakes truck driving school. >> cross driving school? oh, truck driving school, i'm sorry. >> great lakes truck driving school. started in 2008. our first year we trained 287 people and we placed over 70 percent of those people into

jobs. at that time there was enough money, through the workforce investment board, to train those people. in the past few months we've had a number of people on a daily basis coming into our school that's unemployed, but there are no training funds for truck driver training. and i want to know why that has changed. >> well, the recovery act put a huge amount of money into retraining. we are now preparing for next year's budget, and i know that we have actually allocated additional money for retraining. i don't know specifically what's happening that would cause those dollars to dry up with respect to a truck driving school. let me see if i can find out. i'll have one of my staff get your card, and maybe we can provide you some information. >> thank you very much.

>> here's the broader point, though. the story of retraining has become so important. when i went to emc, the precision tool-making place, there were a group of guys -- and one guy who said i should call him "jerry the mechanic." he shakes my hand, and he and his buddy are talking to me. i said, "how long have you been working here?" they said, "twenty years." and i'd noticed that a lot of the equipment now is all digital and fancy, compared to the old machines on the other side of the building. i said, "well, did you guys have to get additional training for this?" and they said, "well, you know what happened was, we used to work in this old plant, and we got laid off. we came here to lorain community college and took a

six-month, 12-hour-a-day course that completely retrained us, and that's what got us these new jobs, and we've been working for over a decade now at these new jobs." now, here's the thing. these guys were -- these guys -- first of all, they weren't plants, as far as i know -- unless the mayor is a lot slicker than i think. but these guys did point out that it was jtpa funds -- job training funds that the federal government and the state and local all work together to make sure that people have access to funds. they also said, though, during that time they were still working eight hours a day because they had found sort of

lower-paying jobs just to pay the rent while they were getting retrained. i said, "okay, so you've been working eight hours and going to class 12 hours?" "yes." i said, "well, when do you sleep?""well, in between class and taking the shift." they did this for six months. i tell this story, one, to emphasize how important the college system is in making our workforce prepared for the 21st century. i make the point because, number two, it only works if the government is providing some help for people to finance their educations, their retraining. but point number three is, even if you've got a great community college, you've got the financing, you've also got to want it. you've also got to want it. think about these guys -- you work eight hours, you go to class 12 hours, you're working -- you're sleeping in between, doing that for six months.

but because they were hungry and they had confidence about their ability to translate their old skills into new skills, they've had steady jobs ever since that allow them to support their families. now, that's the partnership between the government, the free market, businesses, individuals -- that's what we're trying to forge. and that's why i get so frustrated when we have these ideological debates in washington where people start saying how, "oh, obama is just trying to perpetrate big government." what big government exactly have we been trying to perpetrate here? we're trying to fund those guys who want to go to truck driving school. we want to make sure that they've got some money to get trained for a job in the private sector.

when we passed the recovery act, these aren't all a bunch of government jobs. these are jobs that private contractors contract with the state or the city or the county to build roads and highways, the same way that we built the interstate highway system and the intercontinental railroad system. i mean, i understand how people have become mistrustful of government. we don't need big government; we need smart government -- that works and interacts with the private sector to create opportunity for ordinary people. but it can't be this constant ideological argument. people need help. we need to provide them a helping hand. that's what we stand for. all right. i've got time for only, unfortunately, one more question. i've been having a great time. but it is a man's turn here.

all right. is that you, joe? well, this is a ringer. i'm going to talk -- i'll talk to you separately. this is a friend of mine. people will say, ah, he called on a friend of his. i'll talk to you over to the side here. go ahead, this gentleman right here. >> thank you for taking my question. thank you for coming here. i'm a 52-year-old businessman from akron, ohio. i want to create 1,200 jobs. i spend $60,000 of my own money to do a due diligence, travel to china with a german-designed turbine, and they're producing it now in china. i have rights to north america, primarily the great lakes. two things that i'm challenged by -- i'm having a very difficult time raising money. i'm not asking for a handout. all i'm asking is loan me the money; i'll account for it, every dollar, i'll pay it back.

secondly -- and i'm willing to risk millions -- 99 percent of my net worth. the second thing is that ge has a patent -- and i believe in patents. i listened to this gentleman back here, and i can truly appreciate what he's going through. but in this instance, ge inherited this patent from enron, and it's created a wall so that they won't let people come in and build turbines in the united states. now, the patent is going to expire very soon. but now they're calling it a royalty but it's really a gate to keep people out. is there any programs -- i've talked to governor strickland, i've talked to sherrod brown, i've talked to lee fisher. . .

>> let me respond -- first of all -- >> is there any -- is there any federal programs that can help me -- i just want to borrow the money to create this factory and create these jobs. >> well, obviously i don't know about the particular situation so i'll just speak generally to it. and if you want to get one of my team your card, then maybe they can follow up with you. but one of the things that we've done -- or one of the things that we've seen coming out of the financial crisis is that banks are still not lending to small businesses enough. the mayor and i talked about this. the business owners that i talked to will confirm this. and if you ask why -- if you ask the banks why, they'll say,

well, it's a combination of, in some cases, demand really is down; businesses don't have as many customers as they used to o they don't want to lend. that's some cases. but in some cases what you've got is very profitable businesses that are ready to go, ready to invest, got a proven track record -- the banks feel as if regulators are looking over their shoulder and discouraging them from lending. so what i've said to treasury secretary geithner and others is we can't meddle with independent regulators -- their job is to stay apart from politics and make sure the banking system is sound -- but there should be a discussion about whether or not we have seen the pendulum swing too far, where it used to be they'd just lend anybody anything; then they

lost all this money and now they won't lend people with good credit anything. that is not good for the economy. so what we've tried to do is to fill some of these gaps in the meantime. for example, our small business lending through the sba has actually gone up 70 percent. and we've been waiving fees, increasing guarantees, and what we're trying to do is streamline the process for sba loans because right now there's just too much paperwork. it's typical government not having caught up with the 21st century. and you can't have a 50-pound application form. people just -- after a while, it's not worth it, in some cases. so we're trying to do all those things. now, with respect to patents, again, i don't know the particular situation.

i will say this. it's important that we protect internationally intellectual property. it is also important though that we have a patent system that encourages innovation but doesn't just lock in big monopolies that prevent new people from bringing new products into the system. the worst offender of this problem is actually the drug companies, because they will try to lock in their patents for as long as they can to prevent generics from coming onto the market, and that costs customers billions of dollars. and sometimes the drug company will redesign it so it's a caplet instead of a pill, and then try to get a new patent, to get another seven or nine or 10 years of coverage. that is something that we've got to change. i don't know whether that applies to your particular situation, but we have to have a patent system that doesn't

prevent competition. we want a patent system that encourages innovation. now, i'm out of time, but i want to say one last thing. first of all, because there's been so much attention focused on this health care issue this week, i just want to emphasize not the myths but the reality of what is trying to -- that both the house and the senate bill were trying to accomplish, because it's actually very simple. there are a bunch of provisions in it, but it's pretty simple. number one, for those of you who have health insurance, we are trying to get in place reforms that make sure you are getting your money's worth for the insurance that you pay for. that means, for example, that they can't impose a lifetime cap where if you really get sick and suddenly there's some fine

print in there that says you're not completely covered. we're trying to make sure that there is a cap on out-of-pocket expenses so that you don't find out, when you read the fine print, that you've got to pay a huge amount that you thought you were covered for. we're trying to make sure that if you've got a preexisting condition, you can actually still get health insurance, because a lot of people have been banned from getting health insurance because of a preexisting condition. one of the provisions -- one of the reforms we want is to make sure that your 26- or 27-year- old could, up until that age,

could stay on your insurance, so that once they get out of high school and college, they can stay on their parents' insurance for a few years until they've got a more stable job. so you've got all these insurance reforms that we're trying to get passed. now, some people ask, well, why don't you just pass that and forget everything else? here's the problem. let's just take the example of preexisting conditions. we can't prohibit insurance companies from preventing people with preexisting conditions getting insurance unless everybody essentially has insurance. and the reason for that is otherwise what would happen is people would just -- just wouldn't get insurance until they were sick and then they'd go and buy insurance and they couldn't be prohibited. and that would drive everybody else's premiums up. so a lot of these insurance reforms are connected to some other things we have to do to make sure that everybody has

some access to coverage. all right? so the second thing we've been trying to do is to make sure that we're setting up an exchange, which is just a big pool so that people who are individuals, who are self employed, who are small business owners, they can essentially join a big pool of millions of people all across the country, which means that when you go to negotiate with your insurance company you've got the purchasing power of a ford or a gm or wal-mart or a xerox or the federal employees. that's why federal employees have good insurance, and county employees and state employees have good insurance, in part is because they're part of this big pool. and our attitude is, can we make sure that everybody is part of a big pool to drive down costs. that's the second thing we're trying to do. third thing we're trying to do is to try to reduce costs overall because the system -- how many of you, you go into the doctor's office, you fill out a form, you get a checkup, you go fill out another form, somebody else asks you for the form you just filled out. then the doctor fills out a form, you got to take it to the pharmacist. the pharmacist can't read the

doctor's -- this is the only industry in the country that still does that, that still operates on paper systems, that still orders all kinds of unnecessary tests. because a lot of times, i walk in the doctor, i just do what i'm told -- i don't know what he's doing. i don't know whether this test was necessary or whether we could have had the test that i took six months ago e-mailed to the doctor so i wouldn't have to take another test and pay for another test. right? so there are all these methods of trying to reduce costs. and that's what we've been trying to institute. now, i just want to say, as i said in my opening remarks, the process has been less than pretty. when you deal with 535 members

of congress, it's going to be a somewhat ugly process -- not necessarily because any individual member of congress is trying to do something wrong, it's just they may have different ideas, they have different interests, they've got a particular issue of a hospital in their district that they want to see if they can kind of get dealt with and this may be the best vehicle for doing it. they're looking out for their constituents a lot of times. but when you put it all together, it starts looking like just this monstrosity. and it makes people fearful. and it makes people afraid. and they start thinking, you know what, this looks like something that is going to cost me tax dollars and i already have insurance so why should i support this. so i just want to be clear that there are things that have to get done. this is our best chance to do it. we can't keep on putting this off. even if you've got health insurance right now, look at what's happening with your

premiums and look at the trend. it is going to gobble up more and more of your paycheck. ask a chunk of you folks in here who have seen your employers say you've got to pick up more of your payments in terms of higher deductibles or higher copayments. some of you, your employers just said, we can't afford health insurance at all. that's going to happen to more and more people. you asked about social security. let me talk about medicare. medicare will be broke in eight years if we do nothing. right now we give -- we give about $17 billion in subsidies to insurance companies through the medicare system -- your tax dollars. but when we tried to eliminate them, suddenly there were ads on tv -- "oh, obama is trying

to cut medicare." i get all these seniors writing letters: "why are you trying to cut my medicare benefits?" i'm not trying to cut your medicare benefits. i'm trying to stop paying these insurance companies all this money so i can give you a more stable program. the point is this: none of the big issues that we face in this country are simple. everybody wants to act like they're simple. everybody wants to say that they can be done easily. but they're complicated. they're tough. the health care system is a big, complicated system, and doing it right is hard. energy. if we want to be energy independent -- i'm for more oil production. i am for -- i am for new forms of energy. i'm for a safe nuclear industry.

i'm not ideological about this. but we also have to acknowledge that if we're going to actually have a energy- independent economy, that we've got to make some changes. we can't just keep on doing business the same way. and that's going to be a big, complicated discussion. we can't shy away from it, though. we can't sort of start suddenly saying to ourselves, america or congress can't do big things; that we should only do the things that are noncontroversial; we should only do the stuff that's safe.

because if that's what happens, then we're not going to meet the challenges of the 21st century. and that's not who we are. that's not how we used to operate, and that's not how i intend us to operate going forward. we are going to take these big things on, and i'm going to do it, and you're going to do it, because you know that we want to leave a better america for our children and our grandchildren. and that doesn't mean standing still; that means marching forward. i want to march forward with you. i want to work with you. i want to fight for you. i hope you're willing to stand by me, even during these tough times, because i believe in a brighter future for america. thank you, everybody. god bless you. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪

>> next, secretary of state hillary clinton and her speak on internet freedom to rea. them, another chance to see president obama at a town hall meeting in ohio. >> tomorrow, on washington journal, dalia mogahed, william beach, are attracting the prosperity of economic freedom of countries around the world and then nelson smith looks at a charter schools will in the education system. washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> each year, the washington

center brings thousands of students to washington d.c. to experience the workings of our government. this weekend, they will discuss politics, government and their future. >> next, secretary of state clinton called on china to lift restrictions and she has remarks on other countries that have heightened rules. this comes after google reported several serious attacks originating from china. this is just over one hour. >> as chairman of the board of trustees, i welcome you to this marvelous institution and welcome you to an event that i think we will all long remember. we are privileged to witness a major foreign-policy speech by our secretary of state. immediately following, i encourage you to stay for a panel discussion led by ann marie slaughter.

this is the perfect setting for a discussion about freedom. the museum is not a classic museum. it has a lot of history, but its purpose is to promote the freedoms that allowed that history to be freely and fully told by newspapers and by radio and television and now the web. the museum exists to illustrate values embodied in the first amendment. five of freedoms that have been hours for centuries and that we hold as dear going into the internet 21st century as we did at the time of the revolution. the museum is also about reporters who died in the line of duty. there is a beautiful space on the third floor of this building dedicated to them and we at the

museum -- newseum, are pleased to have i am also delighted to welcome you here in another role as president of the john addison foundation, the foundefoundation for informed, engaged communities. we support free expression and journalism excellence. more than 50 years ago, jack knight said that the purpose of a great mistake for was to inform and eliminate the minds of its readers so that the people might determine their own true interests. those values resonate today as the tools of a networked

world. the knight commission is a project of the aspen institute and is cochaired by former solicitor general tim maulson and others. a central conclusion of the report is that internet freedom and universal access are interlocking tools of a functioning democracy. they function together and they should be seen as a common goal. we support the freedoms and the access to information that are at the core of the american experience. those freedoms make us who we are and we should welcome the opportunity to let them to finance. >> we are here to address that came and so it is with pride and great anticipation that i present to you the secretary of state of the united states, hillary clinton.

thank you very much, alberto, for not only that kind introduction but your and your colleagues' leadership of this important institution. it's a pleasure to be here at the newseum. the newseum is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms, and i'm grateful for this opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to the challenges of the 21st century. although i can't see all of you because in settings like this, the lights are in my eyes and you are in the dark, i know that there are many friends and former colleagues. i wish to acknowledge charles overby, the ceo of freedom forum here at the newseum; senator edward kaufman and senator joe lieberman, my former colleagues in the senate, both of whom

worked for passage of the voice act, which speaks to congress's and the american people's commitment to internet freedom, a commitment that crosses party lines and branches of government. also, i'm told here as well are senator sam brownback, senator ted kaufman, representative loretta sanchez, many representatives of the diplomatic corps, ambassadors, chargés, participants in our international visitor leadership program on internet freedom from china, colombia, iran, and lebanon, and moldova. and i also want to acknowledge walter isaacson, president of the aspen institute, recently named to our broadcasting board of governors and, of course, instrumental in supporting the work on internet freedom that the aspen institute has been doing. this is an important speech on a very important subject.

but before i begin, i want to just speak briefly about haiti, because during the last eight days, the people of haiti and the people of the world have joined together to deal with a tragedy of staggering proportions. our hemisphere has seen its share of hardship, but there are few precedents for the situation we're facing in port- au-prince. communication networks have played a critical role in our response. they were, of course, decimated and in many places totally destroyed. and in the hours after the quake, we worked with partners in the private sector; first, to set up the text "haiti" campaign so that mobile phone users in the united states could donate to relief efforts via text messages. that initiative has been a showcase for the generosity of the american people, and thus

far, it's raised over $25 million for recovery efforts. information networks have also played a critical role on the ground. when i was with president preval in port-au-prince on saturday, one of his top priorities was to try to get communication up and going. the government couldn't talk to each other, what was lt of it, and ngos, our civilian leadership, our military leadership were severely impacted. the technology community has set up interactive maps to help us identify needs and target resources. and on monday, a seven-year-old girl and two women were pulled from the rubble of a collapsed supermarket by an american search-and-rescue team after they sent a text message calling for help. now, these examples are manifestations of a much broader phenomenon. the spread of information networks is forming a new

nervous system for our planet. when something happens in haiti or hunan, the rest of us learn about it in real time from real people. and we can respond in real time as well. americans eager to help in the aftermath of a disaster and the girl trapped in the supermarket are connected in ways that were not even imagined a year ago, even a generation ago. that same principle applies to almost all of humanity today. as we sit here, any of you or maybe more likely, any of our children can take out the tools that many carry every day and transmit this discussion to billions across the world. now, in many respects, information has never been so free. there are more ways to spread more ideas to more people than at any moment in history. and even in authoritarian

countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable. during his visit to china in november, for example, president obama held a town hall meeting with an online component to highlight the importance of the internet. in response to a question that was sent in over the internet, he defended the right of people to freely access information, and said that the more freely information flows, the stronger societies become. he spoke about how access to information helps citizens hold their own governments accountable, generates new ideas, encourages creativity and entrepreneurship. the united states belief in that ground truth is what brings me here today. because amid this unprecedented surge in connectivity, we must also recognize that these technologies are not an unmitigated blessing. these tools are also being exploited to undermine human progress and political rights.

just as steel can be used to build hospitals or machine guns, or nuclear power can either energize a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or for ill. the same networks that help organize movements for freedom also enable al-qaida to spew hatred and incite violence against the innocent. and technologies with the potential to open up access to government and promote transparency can also be hijacked by governments to crush dissent and deny human rights. in the last year, we've seen a spike in threats to the free flow of information. china, tunisia, and uzbekistan have stepped up their censorship of the internet.

in vietnam, access to popular social networking sites has suddenly disappeared. and last friday in egypt, 30 bloggers and activists were detained. one member of this group, bassem samir, who is thankfully no longer in prison, is with us today. so while it is clear that the spread of these technologies is transforming our world, it is still unclear how that transformation will affect the human rights and the human welfare of the world's population. on their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress, but the united states does. we stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. and we recognize that the world's information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. now, this challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic. the words of the first amendment to our constitution are carved

in 50 tons of tennessee marble on the front of this building. and every generation of americans has worked to protect the values etched in that stone. franklin roosevelt built on these ideas when he delivered his four freedoms speech in 1941. now, at the time, americans faced a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence. but the vision of a world in which all people enjoyed freedom of expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear transcended the troubles of his day. and years later, one of my heroes, eleanor roosevelt, worked to have these principles adopted as a cornerstone of the universal declaration of human rights. they have provided a lodestar to every succeeding generation, guiding us, galvanizing us, and enabling us to move forward in the face of uncertainty. so as technology hurtles

forward, we must think back to that legacy. we need to synchronize our technological progress with our principles. in accepting the nobel prize, president obama spoke about the need to build a world in which peace rests on the inherent rights and dignities of every individual. and in my speech on human rights at georgetown a few days later, i talked about how we must find ways to make human rights a reality. today, we find an urgent need to protect these freedoms on the digital frontiers of the 21st century. there are many other networks in the world. some aid in the movement of people or resources, and some facilitate exchanges between individuals with the same work or interests. but the internet is a network that magnifies the power and potential of all others.

and that's why we believe it's critical that its users are assured certain basic freedoms. freedom of expression is first among them. this freedom is no longer defined solely by whether citizens can go into the town square and criticize their government without fear of retribution. blogs, emails, social networks, and text messages have opened up new forums for exchanging ideas, and created new targets for censorship. as i speak to you today, government censors somewhere are working furiously to erase my words from the records of history. but history itself has already condemned these tactics. two months ago, i was in germany to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the berlin wall. the leaders gathered at that ceremony paid tribute to the courageous men and women on the far side of that barrier who made the case against oppression by circulating small pamphlets called samizdat. now, these leaflets questioned the claims and intentions of

dictatorships in the eastern bloc and many people paid dearly for distributing them. but their words helped pierce the concrete and concertina wire of the iron curtain. the berlin wall symbolized a world divided and it defined an entire era. today, remnants of that wall sit inside this museum where they belong, and the new iconic infrastructure of our age is the internet. instead of division, it stands for connection. but even as networks spread to nations around the globe, virtual walls are cropping up in place of visible walls. some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent their people from accessing portions of the world's networks. they've expunged words, names, and phrases from search engine results. they have violated the privacy of citizens who engage in non-

violent political speech. these actions contravene the universal declaration on human rights, which tells us that all people have the right "to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." with the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. and beyond this partition, viral videos and blog posts are becoming the samizdat of our day. as in the dictatorships of the past, governments are targeting independent thinkers who use these tools. in the demonstrations that followed iran's presidential elections, grainy cell phone footage of a young woman's bloody murder provided a digital indictment of the government's brutality. we've seen reports that when iranians living overseas posted online criticism of their nation's leaders, their family

members in iran were singled out for retribution. and despite an intense campaign of government intimidation, brave citizen journalists in iran continue using technology to show the world and their fellow citizens what is happening inside their country. in speaking out on behalf of their own human rights, the iranian people have inspired the world. and their courage is redefining how technology is used to spread truth and expose injustice. now, all societies recognize that free expression has its limits. we do not tolerate those who incite others to violence, such as the agents of al-qaida who are, at this moment, using the internet to promote the mass murder of innocent people across the world. and hate speech that targets

individuals on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation is reprehensible. it is an unfortunate fact that these issues are both growing challenges that the international community must confront together. and we must also grapple with the issue of anonymous speech. those who use the internet to recruit terrorists or distribute stolen intellectual property cannot divorce their online actions from their real world identities. but these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes. the freedom of expression may be the most obvious freedom to face challenges with the spread

of new technologies, but it is not the only one. the freedom of worship usually involves the rights of individuals to commune or not commune with their creator. and that's one channel of communication that does not rely on technology. but the freedom of worship also speaks to the universal right to come together with those who share your values and vision for humanity. in our history, those gatherings often took place in churches, synagogues, mosques and temples. today, they may also take place on line. the internet can help bridge divides between people of different faiths. as the president said in cairo, freedom of religion is central to the ability of people to live together. and as we look for ways to expand dialogue, the internet holds out such tremendous promise. we've already begun connecting students in the united states with young people in muslim communities around the world to discuss global challenges. and we will continue using this tool to foster discussion between individuals from different religious communities. some nations, however, have co- opted the internet as a tool to target and silence people of faith. last year, for example, in saudi arabia, a man spent months in prison for blogging about

christianity. and a harvard study found that the saudi government blocked many web pages about hinduism, judaism, christianity, and even islam. countries including vietnam and china employed similar tactics to restrict access to religious information. now, just as these technologies must not be used to punish peaceful political speech, they must also not be used to persecute or silence religious minorities. now, prayers will always travel on higher networks. but connection technologies like the internet and social networking sites should enhance individuals' ability to worship as they see fit, come together

with people of their own faith, and learn more about the beliefs of others. we must work to advance the freedom of worship online just as we do in other areas of life. there are, of course, hundreds of millions of people living without the benefits of these technologies. in our world, as i've said many times, talent may be distributed universally, but opportunity is not. and we know from long experience that promoting social and economic development in countries where people lack access to knowledge, markets, capital, and opportunity can be frustrating and sometimes futile work. in this context, the internet can serve as a great equalizer. by providing people with access to knowledge and potential markets, networks can create opportunities where none exist. over the last year, i've seen this firsthand in kenya, where farmers have seen their income grow by as much as 30 percent since they started using mobile banking technology; in bangladesh, where more than 300,000 people have signed up

to learn english on their mobile phones; and in sub-saharan africa, where women entrepreneurs use the internet to get access to microcredit loans and connect themselves to global markets. now, these examples of progress can be replicated in the lives of the billion people at the bottom of the world's economic ladder. in many cases, the internet, mobile phones, and other connection technologies can do for economic growth what the green revolution did for agriculture. you can now generate significant yields from very modest inputs. and one world bank study found that in a typical developing country, a 10 percent increase in the penetration rate for mobile phones led to an almost 1 percent increase in per capita gdp. to just put this into context, for india, that would translate into almost $10 billion a year. a connection to global

information networks is like an on-ramp to modernity. in the early years of these technologies, many believed that they would divide the world between haves and have-nots. but that hasn't happened. there are 4 billion cell phones in use today. many of them are in the hands of market vendors, rickshaw drivers, and others who've historically lacked access to education and opportunity. information networks have become a great leveler, and we should use them together to help lift people out of poverty and give them a freedom from want. now, we have every reason to be hopeful about what people can accomplish when they leverage communication networks and connection technologies to

achieve progress. but make no mistake some are and will continue to use global information networks for darker purposes. violent extremists, criminal cartels, sexual predators, and authoritarian governments all seek to exploit these global networks. just as terrorists have taken advantage of the openness of our societies to carry out their plots, violent extremists use the internet to radicalize and intimidate. as we work to advance freedoms, we must also work against those who use communication networks as tools of disruption and fear. governments and citizens must have confidence that the networks at the core of their national security and economic prosperity are safe and resilient. now this is about more than petty hackers who deface websites. our ability to bank online, use electronic commerce, and safeguard billions of dollars in intellectual property are all at stake if we cannot rely on the security of our information

networks. disruptions in these systems demand a coordinated response by all governments, the private sector, and the international community. we need more tools to help law enforcement agencies cooperate across jurisdictions when criminal hackers and organized crime syndicates attack networks for financial gain. the same is true when social ills such as child pornography and the exploitation of trafficked women and girls online is there for the world to see and for those who exploit these people to make a profit. we applaud efforts such as the council on europe's convention on cybercrime that facilitate international cooperation in

prosecuting such offenses. and we wish to redouble our efforts. we have taken steps as a government, and as a department, to find diplomatic solutions to strengthen global cyber security. we have a lot of people in the state department working on this. they've joined together, and we created two years ago an office to coordinate foreign policy in cyberspace. we've worked to address this challenge at the un and in other multilateral forums and to put cyber security on the world's agenda. and president obama has just appointed a new national cyberspace policy coordinator who will help us work even more closely to ensure that everyone's networks stay free, secure, and reliable. states, terrorists, and those who would act as their proxies must know that the united states will protect our networks.

those who disrupt the free flow of information in our society or any other pose a threat to our economy, our government, and our civil society. countries or individuals that engage in cyber attacks should face consequences and international condemnation. in an internet-connected world, an attack on one nation's networks can be an attack on all. and by reinforcing that message, we can create norms of behavior among states and encourage respect for the global networked commons. the final freedom, one that was probably inherent in what both president and mrs. roosevelt thought about and wrote about all those years ago, is one that flows from the four i've already mentioned: the freedom to connect the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet, to websites, or to each other. the freedom to connect is like the freedom of assembly, only in cyberspace. it allows individuals to get online, come together, and hopefully cooperate. once you're on the internet, you don't need to be a tycoon or a rock star to have a huge impact on society. the largest public response to the terrorist attacks in mumbai

was launched by a 13-year-old boy. he used social networks to organize blood drives and a massive interfaith book of condolence. in colombia, an unemployed engineer brought together more than 12 million people in 190 cities around the world to demonstrate against the farc terrorist movement. the protests were the largest antiterrorist demonstrations in history. and in the weeks that followed, the farc saw more demobilizations and desertions than it had during a decade of military action. and in mexico, a single email from a private citizen who was fed up with drug-related violence snowballed into huge demonstrations in all of the country's 32 states. in mexico city alone, 150,000 people took to the streets in protest. so the internet can help humanity push back against those who promote violence and crime and extremism.

in iran and moldova and other countries, online organizing has been a critical tool for advancing democracy and enabling citizens to protest suspicious election results. and even in established democracies like the united states, we've seen the power of these tools to change history. some of you may still remember the 2008 presidential election here. [laughter.] the freedom to connect to these technologies can help transform societies, but it is also critically important to individuals. i was recently moved by the story of a doctor and i won't tell you what country he was from who was desperately trying to diagnose his daughter's rare medical condition. he consulted with two dozen specialists, but he still didn't have an answer. but he finally identified the condition, and found a cure, by

using an internet search engine. that's one of the reasons why unfettered access to search engine technology is so important in individuals' lives. now, the principles i've outlined today will guide our approach in addressing the issue of internet freedom and the use of these technologies. and i want to speak about how we apply them in practice. the united states is committed to devoting the diplomatic, economic, and technological resources necessary to advance these freedoms. we are a nation made up of immigrants from every country and every interest that spans the globe. our foreign policy is premised on the idea that no country more than america stands to benefit when there is

cooperation among peoples and states. and no country shoulders a heavier burden when conflict and misunderstanding drive nations apart. so we are well placed to seize the opportunities that come with interconnectivity. and as the birthplace for so many of these technologies, including the internet itself, we have a responsibility to see them used for good. to do that, we need to develop our capacity for what we call, at the state department, 21st century statecraft. realigning our policies and our priorities will not be easy. but adjusting to new technology rarely is. when the telegraph was introduced, it was a source of great anxiety for many in the diplomatic community, where the prospect of receiving daily instructions from capitals was not entirely welcome. but just as our diplomats eventually mastered the telegraph, they are doing the same to harness the potential of these new tools as well. and i'm proud that the state department is already working in more than 40 countries to help individuals silenced by oppressive governments.

we are making this issue a priority at the united nations as well, and we're including internet freedom as a component in the first resolution we introduced after returning to the united nations human rights council. we are also supporting the development of new tools that enable citizens to exercise their rights of free expression by circumventing politically motivated censorship. we are providing funds to groups around the world to make sure that those tools get to the people who need them in local languages, and with the training they need to access the internet safely. the united states has been assisting in these efforts for some time, with a focus on implementing these programs as efficiently and effectively as possible. both the american people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is committed to helping promote internet freedom. we want to put these tools in the hands of people who will use them to advance democracy

and human rights, to fight climate change and epidemics, to build global support for president obama's goal of a world without nuclear weapons, to encourage sustainable economic development that lifts the people at the bottom up. that's why today i'm announcing that over the next year, we will work with partners in industry, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to establish a standing effort that will harness the power of connection technologies and apply them to our diplomatic goals. by relying on mobile phones, mapping applications, and other new tools, we can empower citizens and leverage our traditional diplomacy. we can address deficiencies in the current market for innovation. let me give you one example. let's say i want to create a mobile phone application that would allow people to rate

government ministries, including ours, on their responsiveness and efficiency and also to ferret out and report corruption. the hardware required to make this idea work is already in the hands of billions of potential users. and the software involved would be relatively inexpensive to develop and deploy. if people took advantage of this tool, it would help us target our foreign assistance spending, improve lives, and encourage foreign investment in countries with responsible governments. however, right now, mobile application developers have no financial assistance to pursue that project on their own, and the state department currently lacks a mechanism to make it happen. but this initiative should help resolve that problem and provide long-term dividends from modest investments in innovation. we're going to work with experts to find the best structure for this venture, and

we'll need the talent and resources of technology companies and nonprofits in order to get the best results most quickly. so for those of you in the room who have this kind of talent, expertise, please consider yourselves invited to help us. in the meantime, there are companies, individuals, and institutions working on ideas and applications that could already advance our diplomatic and development objectives. and the state department will be launching an innovation competition to give this work an immediate boost. we'll be asking americans to send us their best ideas for applications and technologies that help break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, connect people to the services and information they need. microsoft, for example, has already developed a prototype for a digital doctor that could help provide medical care in

isolated rural communities. we want to see more ideas like that. and we'll work with the winners of the competition and provide grants to help build their ideas to scale. now, these new initiatives will supplement a great deal of important work we've already done over this past year. in the service of our diplomatic and diplomacy objectives, i assembled a talented and experienced team to lead our 21st century statecraft efforts. this team has traveled the world helping governments and groups leverage the benefits of connection technologies. they have stood up a civil society 2.0 initiative to help grassroots organizations enter the digital age. they are putting in place a program in mexico to help combat drug-related violence by allowing people to make untracked reports to reliable sources to avoid having retribution visited against them. they brought mobile banking to afghanistan and are now pursuing the same effort in the democratic republic of the congo. in pakistan, they created the first-ever social mobile network, called our voice, that has already produced tens of millions of messages and

connected young pakistanis who want to stand up to violent extremism. in a short span, we have taken significant strides to translate the promise of these technologies into results that make a difference. but there is still so much more to be done. and as we work together with the private sector and foreign governments to deploy the tools of 21st century statecraft, we have to remember our shared responsibility to safeguard the freedoms that i've talked about today. we feel strongly that principles like information freedom aren't just good policy, not just somehow connected to our national values, but they are universal and they're also good for business. to use market terminology, a publicly listed company in tunisia or vietnam that operates in an environment of censorship will always trade at a discount relative to an identical firm in a free society.

if corporate decision makers don't have access to global sources of news and information, investors will have less confidence in their decisions over the long term. countries that censor news and information must recognize that from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech. if businesses in your nations are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably impact on growth. increasingly, u.s. companies are making the issue of internet and information freedom a greater consideration in their business decisions. . .

and consistently in the context of our positive cooperative and comprehensive relationship. ultimately, this issue is not just about information freedom. it is about what type of world we want and what kind of world we will inhabit. it is about whether we live on a planet with 1 internet, when

global community and a common body of knowledge that benefits and unites us all or a fragmented planet and which access to information and opportunity is dependent upon where you live and the winds of censors. historically, asymmetrical access to information is one of the leading causes of interstate conflict. when we say serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it is critical that people on both sides of the problem have access to the same set of facts and opinions. americans can consider information presented by foreign governments. we do not block your attempts to communicate with the people in the u.s. citizens and societies that practice censorship lack exposure to outside views. in north korea for example, the government has tried to

completely isolate the citizens. this lopsided access to information increases both the likelihood of conflict and the probability that small this agreement could escalate. i hope that responsible government with an interest in global stability will work with us to address such imbalances. for companies, this issue is about more than claiming the moral high ground. it comes down to the trust between firms and their customers. consumers everywhere want to have confidence that the internet companies they rely on will provide comprehensive search results and acts as responsible stewards of their own personal information. firms that earned the confidence of those countries and provide that type of service will prosper in the global marketplace. i really believe that those who lose that confidence of their

customers will eventually lose customers. no matter where you live, people want to believe that what they put in to the internet is not going to be used against them. censorship should not be in any way accepted by any company from anywhere. in america, american companies need to make a principled stand. this needs to be part of our national brand. i am confident that consumers worldwide will reward companies that follow those principles. we are reinvigorating the global internet freedom task force. we are urging u.s. media companies to take a proactive role in challenging foreign governments. we have a responsibility to safeguard freedom of expression. when business dealings threaten to undermine this dealing, --

this freedom, they need to consider what is right and not what will lead to a profit. we are encouraged by the work that is being done by the global network initiative, the companies that are working with an teo's and academics to respond government requests to censorship. the initiative goes beyond the statements and principles and it establishes mechanisms to provide real accountability and transparency. as part of our commitment to support responsible engagement on and commission freedom, the state department will be convening a high level meeting next month cochaired by secretaries to bring together firms that provide that for services -- provide network services. we want a partnership in addressing this 21st century challenge. pursuing the freedoms i talked about today is i believe the

right thing to do but i also believe it is the smart thing. by advancing this agenda, we align our principles, our economic goals and our strategic goals. we need to work toward a goal where networks and information prince people closer together and expands the definition of the global community. given the magnitude of the challenges facing us, we need people around the world to pool their knowledge and creativity to help rebuild the global economy, to protect the impairment, to 2 feet violent extremism and build a future. let me close by asking you to remember that little girl who was pulled from the rubble on monday in port-au-prince. she is alive. she was reunited with her family. she will have a chance to grow up because these networks took a

voice that was buried and spread it to the world. no nation, no group, no individual should stay buried in the rubble of oppression. we cannot stand by when people are separated from the human family by walls of censorship. we cannot be silent about these issues simply because we cannot hear the cries. -- hear the cries. but this make these technologies a force for real progress the world over and let us go forward together to champion these freedoms for our times, for our young people, who deserve every opportunity that we can give them. thank you it all very much. [applause]

>> you will call on people and have been identified themselves? >> correct. >> thank you. thank you, madame secretary. she has agreed to answer some questions. if you would, there are going to be three microphones and the audience if you would make your questions short, we would appreciate it. identify yourselves, please. could you wait for the microphone? " madam secretary, you talked about anonymity online and how that is -- i am sorry. i am from the community college. you talk about anonymity online.

and how we have to prevent that but also censorship by governments and i was struck by having a veil of anonymity is actually quite beneficial in certain circumstances. how are you booking to strike a balance between that and this emphasis on censorship? >> absolutely. this is one of the challenges we face. on one hand, anonymity per text the exploitation -- protect the exploitation of children. on the other hand, it protects the free expression of opposition to pursue governments. anonymity allows the theft of intellectual property but it also permits people to come together in settings that give them some basis for free expression without identifying themselves. none of this will be easy. i think that is a fair

statement. as i said, we all have very end needs -- gary and needs and rights and responsibilities. i think the should be our guiding light. we should err on the side of openness and do everything we can possible while recognizing that with any rules, there are exceptions. how we go after this is what we are now requesting many of you who are experts in this area to lend your help to us in doing. we need the guidance of technology experts and in my experience, most of them are younger than 40. not all of them. we need to the companies that do this and the dissident voices who have actually lived on the front lines so that we can try to work through the best way to

make that balance to which you prefer. -- to which you refer. >> right over here. >> i am a big global freedom of expression officer at freedom house. it spoke about business. relying on them to do the moral right thing and not look for profits first. the goal of business, though, is to make profit. what role does the world trade organization play and how are you going to encourage they do the right thing? >> this is one of the issues of that we want to have a very vigorous discussion about. asking business to do the right thing is not always easily translated into practical practice. on the other hand, i think there is a more broad context. companies that do not follow the

sanitary hedging procedures of the prior generation pay a price for it. government and business have to constantly be working together to make sure that food and other products that end up on the shelves of consumers are safe. individual consumers and a global interconnected economy cannot possibly exercise that vigilance on their own. similarly when it comes to censorship, we believe that having an international effort to establish some rules over internet connectivity and trying to protect the basic freedoms and i discussed is and the long term interest of business and frankly, i would argue government. i use the example of the fall of the berlin wall. it is very difficult to keep information out. it was hard to keep it out during a prior age.

it is even harder now. trying to adjust to that, work with that, and learn from that about what can be done better is going to challenge every single government in the world. i think business being such a driver of economic growth globally has to have that in mind both when they go into countries and when they confront the kind of censorship we are hearing about around the world. it is particularly acute for technology companies, media companies, obviously, but it is not in any way limited to them. other companies are facing censorship as well. this is an issue that we have to surface and talk about and tried to find as much common ground and keep climbing more as we go forward. -- keep claiming more as we go

forward. >> t, a -- thank you. i am the director of a website promoting democracy and human rights and libya. we have been attacked many times. how would like madame secretary to tell me how you can help those voices which do not have technology or the money to protect themselves against hackers? they are the silencers of voices from outside the country's which lack freedom and freedom of expression. >> that is one of the issues that we are debating and we are looking for ideas as to how we can answer it in a positive way. we would invite your participation. after i take the last question, the director of my policy

planning unit inside the state department and the former dean of the woodrow wilson school who has written a lot about internet connectivity and how we have to begin to look at the world as the network reality that it is will be leading a discussion. i hope some of you with ideas, suggestions, cautions, worries, will stay and really get into an in depth discussion about that. >> right here in the mezzanine. >> we served vietnamese americans. your initiative will take some time to take effect, just recently, the vietnamese government sentenced several bloggers to several years in prison. what can your group do to confront such an emergency situation? >> we have publicly spoken out

against the detention, conviction and imprisonment of the bloggers in vietnam and the buddhist monks and nuns who have been subjected to harassment of vietnam has made so much progress and it is moving with great alacrity into the future and raising the standard of living of their people and we do not believe they should be afraid of commentary that is internal. in fact, i would like to see more governments that if you disagree with what a block or website is saying, argue with them. explain what it is you are doing. put out contrary information. point out what the pitfalls are of the position that somebody might be taken. i hope that vietnam will move more in that direction because i think it was hand in hand with

the progress that we have seen in the last few years. >> i am with the association for competitive technology. you mentioned that companies have to do the right thing, not just what is good for profits. what if i am a huge contract and -- co. and the chinese government is coming after my guy for information. he has resisted but he is being taken to jail and my equipment is being hauled away. what can the state department to in that situation? >> we speak out on those individual cases. we are hoping to engage in a very candid and constructive conversation with the chinese government. we have had a positive year of very open discussions with our

chinese counterparts. i think we have established a foundation of understanding. we disagree on important issues with them. they disagree on important issues with us. they have their perspective, we have ours. obviously, we want to encourage and support increasing openness in china because we believe it will further add to the dynamic growth and the democratization at the local level that we see occurring in china. we continue to speak out on a broader set of issues. we hope to really have the kind of discussion that might lead to better understanding and changes in the approach that is currently being taken. >> thank you. >> up in the very back. if you could come to the aisle. >> i am from the atoms center in

virginia. my question for you is when you talk about social networking, we need to address the issue of youth in the muslim world. [inaudible] one of the reason people are being radicalized is because people to not have a way to express themselves. would you be open to those ideas? >> yes, we would. in the wake of the president's speech in cairo, we have been expanding genetically our outreach particularly to muslim youth. i agree with you completely that not only young people in the muslim world but young people across the world are increasingly disconnected from authority, from government, from

all kinds of institutions that have been historically the foundations of society because they are so interconnected through the internet. something that my generation cannot really understand. in america, the average young person spent eight hours a day with media. the internet, cell phones, televisions, think about that. eight hours per day. that is more time than they spend in school. more time than they spend with their families. it is often more time than they spend asleep. when you think about the power of this information connection to young people, i do not think it should cause panic in people my age. i do not think we should begin to try to stop and prevented. we should figure out a way how to better utilize it. if you go back in the millennia, how values are passed around, sitting around a fire. how were bodies communicated in the home? parents, grandparents.

values are now being communicated by the internet. let's figure out how better to use it and participate in it and focus on the needs of young people. they are often looking for information and answers. at least until now, in most cultures that i am aware of, despite all of the time the done people spend with technology, when they are asked who did they look to for guidance about values, they still say their family. if families increasingly feel disconnected from their highly connected young people and do not know what they're done people are doing online, then we see the problems that can result. they're so pretty manipulator's online right now. -- so many manipulators online right now. not just a muslim youth but

youth everywhere. the fund by all kinds of characteristics. we have all kinds of work to do through government and families and education systems and other institutions to make sure that we understand the power of this technology and to engage with young people through it and about it. >> a lot of hands are going up. let's try over here on the far right. >> thank you. i am with the sullivan foundation. thank you for inviting us to apply for grants. i am interested in knowing what are the procedures and what the agency means to do and if you have somebody in the brunn we can follow up with. >> in addition to our panel, we have several members of the team for working on these initiatives. we can connect. if we invite to do, we know how

to find you. we will make sure that you get information about all of these programs. >> there is no anonymity in this room. >> we have time for one more question. i would encourage you to stay for the panel on connection technologies and diplomacy's immediately following. i am sure some of the questions will be answered there. one last question over here on the far left. can we get a microphone? thank you. >> thank you so much. it was a wonderful program. i am from howard university. at howard, we are very much interested in particular aspects of the internet with respect to the digital divide.

in your story about the young girl being pulled out of the rubble because of the text message she was able to send brings to mind how many others could have been saved if they had the technology. >> absolutely. >> we are interested in knowing about access. not only internet freedom but free internet for all and the universal service aspect and what can be done, particularly right now for haiti. >> thank you for that. as you know, that is a continuing issue for us and for many countries around the world. we are at 4 billion cell phones. the cell phone is becoming the principal tools of communication. both for the applications that are on it, through the texting that it enables, and there are a lot of groups, ngos's that are

passing out and providing cell phones at low costs. we need to keep incentivizing and encouraging the technology to be as low cost as possible so it can be as ubiquitous as possible. i think we have made enormous progress. 10 years ago, we talk a lot about the digital divide even in our own country. we are overcoming that but there are still questions of access and cost. we obviously have to recognize that a lot of the search engines are run by for-profit companies but it is not going to be free. there are ways of trying to encourage more universal access. that is part of the obama administration's policy on technology, not just the development aspect. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. [applause]

>> the chinese government reacted to secretary of state hillary clinton's speech and said that the u.s. should stop making unfounded accusations. a followup from the state department. this is 30 minutes. >> good afternoon and welcome to the state department. we are pleased this afternoon to have with us the senior advisor for innovation alec ross and the assistant for human rights. with no further ado, i will handed over to them.

>> thank you. i just want to frame and give a bit of historical context to the remarks made yesterday. i thought it was appropriate that if it was not the day, it was off by one day, basically one year from when she gave that speech. for me, that was significant. one of the things that in my opinion that has to find her tenure has been figuring out a way in which we can modernize -- modernize our statecraft. we have learned a lot over the course of this year and we have learned some things that are very positive about the role that technology can play in our foreign policy. we learn things that are significantly less positive. among the positive things we have seen, we have nothing to celebrate as it relates to haiti. it should be noted that it was at the secretary's direction that the state department set up the text heydey program which

has now raised more than $26 million. we also looking back further the role that digital communications networks can play in getting america path message out. it is notable that the president's speech in cairo was able to reach so many people in reach them so effectively because living in a digital age, we are no longer bound by the strictures of traditional broadcast media. people were able to get it on their cell phones. people were able to see and hear him over the internet. we have also learned a number of negative things. the past year has been a search in al qaeda and other extremist organizations using global communications networks to recruit young people into their ranks. we have seen authoritarian governments increasingly use networks and infiltrates them,

and monitor them, and oftentimes shut them down. a prominent example of this was in iran leading up in during the aftermath of the election there. i am sure that you will have a question or two about china. so many of you keep asking me questions about china. one of the things that i wanted to point out was that according to the open that initiative, a 21 countries engaged in extreme censorship or filtering of political content. notably, this does not include countries that monitor content for cultural reasons such as pornography or overly secular content. 31% of the world's population lives in countries where the government centers the internet

for political content. we find this data is staggering. that is part of what prompted yesterday's pause speech by the secretary. it is part of why we are elevating internet freedom from foreign policy are came back to something more central to our statecraft. one of the key takeaways that i wrote you all took in the speech was her point that this not just good to the issue of information freedom but also goes to the issue of what type of world we want to live in. if we want to live in the world with one internet, one college and now meant -- one common knowledge base or in a world where access to information and knowledge is based on what country in which you live and the winds of the sensors -- whims of the centers in that country.

many of you know me as obama's tech guide during the campaign. what i had really spent the last 10 years doing is focusing on the digital divide. but started a nonprofit in the basement about 10 years ago that group from being four guys with no money and a hand full of ideas to the world war's portis digital divide corporation. for me, mr.'s announcement was a shift in the -- yesterday's announcement was a shift in the concerns of the internet being the digital divide being an issue of access. can one get access to the internet today, where i think the number one problem and issue that we have to address this it relates to the communications problem is is the internet open? is it uncensored?

i want to highlight the role of shared responsibility in this. the secretary spoke very directly to the private sector. not just america's private sector but global technology companies. that is indicative that this is not just a government to government concern. point in fact, i think one thing that is important about internet freedom is that the really shows convergence of security issues, human rights issues, and economic issues. it is not one of those three things. it is all three of them. as such, the private sector does not play a secondary role within that. they have a primary role to play. i thought she spoke very compellingly about the initiatives that are working. one of them was described. what i would highlight here is

that it is not something we are engaging in only on the cover meant to government basis but on a private sector level, as well. >> thank you. i just want to say briefly before opening up, for me and for us, the speech yesterday was really a part of a trilogy. in the last five weeks, the secretary has spoken about human rights, democracy and development. she spoke a couple weeks ago about development and spell that out and the speech was within that framework. in the democracy and human rights development speech, there were three things the secretary spoke about that i think are reflected in the discussion of internet freedom. one is that our approach to human rights and democracy development is one of principles -- principal engagement.

we're going to engage the world in multiple ways. this is one way in which that the engagement will take place. diplomatically, in terms of technical assistance, in terms of training, we are going to be actively involved in promoting internet freedom. we also spoke about universal standards and the fact that there is a global discussion of human rights standards. the notion of free expression articulated yesterday as part of that notion that there is one standard of freedom, one standard of free expression across the board to every government and every country everybody is entitled to the same access to information. the third thing is to talk about the fact that it is very hard to change countries from outside. countries change from within. when we talk about democracy, it is a broad notion that

empowering society, strengthening the press and untiring and creating an environment in which people can change their own societies, these tools and connective tools are a prime way that people are communicating within their own societies and communicating with the rest of the world. this is billy a vital piece of what we are trying to do when we -- this is really a vital piece of what we're trying to do about connectivity. >> on china, do you have any reaction or response to the chinese rather a hostile reaction to the secretary's speech? >> i think what the secretary said yesterday is that we have a range of relations with the chinese. there are a lot of issues on the table. there are some issues where we are working cooperatively and some issues where we disagree.

this is an area that will be part of the dialogue going forward. part of the strategic dialogue in an area in which we have differences. >> do you have any indication -- how is the dialogue going with the chinese? >> in my mind, it is part of a strategic discussion we're having on a range of issues. >> it does not seem like they are willing to talk about it. >> that is not true. we are trying to figure out with the forum will be for those discussions and what the discussion will be. there is already a discussion on a range of human rights issues. there will be a more formal dialogue in the coming months which we are committed to and so are they. >> one more specifically on haiti. the text messaging donations are good but i noticed that one thing that the military is to win is they are bringing in the

2000 hand-held radios. these are knocked internet -- these are old school technology. >> we have a task force right now that is focused on technology. we are working very closely usaid is working on. we believe it is a priority to restore communications to the island. not just so that people can communicate with each other and communicate with loved ones but also be able to leverage these platforms to help people connect to services during the recovery. >> sort of a general and

specific question on china. in terms of carrying out in concrete terms with the secretary talked about yesterday, there has been some discussion about whether the u.s. would consider making internet freedom a trade issue in the sense that some of the software that allows the chinese to do what they do is actually supplied by american companies. with the u.s. consider putting in export control on that technology? also, support for technology that allows people to get around fire walls. the state department set aside money to support these kinds of efforts. one that has gotten attention is this gis initiative. it has not yet gotten state department funding. is there any thought being given to giving them some support? >> that me and took the second question first. our approach is really that

there is not one size that fits all. this is a moment when a lot of different technologies and groups and individuals are trying to break the fire wall. there is not a silver bullet that will solve it all. we have encouraged the group you mentioned and others to apply. in fact, we have a request for proposals that is out that closes today or tomorrow. we very much welcome any group that has a piece of this. we view ourselves in some ways as the venture firms in california that try a lot of different things. things might work. we have to try different things in different countries. technology is one piece, diplomacy is another, we have to adjust -- address this in a multifaceted way. everybody is welcome to apply. there's more coming down the pipe. >> i think the secretary laid

out a great vision for what we specifically are going to do. we are also now in an interagency process that includes commerce, the white house, so there is going to be an entire government approach to this in addition to what we're doing specifically at the state department. >> specifically on export controls. because that is say ustr thing that you are not the right guy to answer or are you saying that those types of things make sense? >> we are elevating internet freedom as a matter of foreign policy. we will be working with our partners in the entire government to make sure we are very aggressive and ensuring that it happened. >> does that include actively subverting the chinese fire wall? these sovereign government fireball? >> i will not expand on the

comments that the secretary made. >> the question was about funding for groups that are trying to get around the fire wall. you are finding that? in other words -- >> let me answer that in a broader sense. we are working in about 40 countries. we are working with individuals and groups that are in a range of ways trying to exert their freedom of expression. in many of those countries, the government would rather not have discussions of their own actions or human rights or a range of other subjects. it is our intention to continue to work with individuals and groups that are promoting free expression. the state department did this 35 years ago working with soviet dissidents who were fighting against governments that wanted

to restrict their ability to speak and write and assemble and discuss these issues. some governments are going to characterize that in a way that you did. from our perspective, this is a question of empowering people and their own societies to speak with one another and to speak to the rest of the world about things that matter. >> fair enough but the cold war is over. you seem to be striving -- describing as -- >> i did not mention china. there are a range of countries. they need to constrict and constrain access to the internet. they need to make it impossible for people to get information pertaining to those countries. they need to constrain people within those countries. our view is that the internet should be open and free. people should be able to express their views. there should be a strong society within those countries that is able to raise issues.

>> let me expand that briefly by pointing out that we are focusing on one aspect of internet freedom and the conversation at this point. the secretary yesterday laid out a broad swath of issues within which she defines internet freedom. for example, one thing that causes a great deal of concern is countries were young women who are caught using the internet, using social media, are subject to what people call honor killings and beatings. well circumvention is one aspect of internet freedom, so too are other aspects. ensuring that it is not just men who can be a part of the digital age. it is also the case of issues of religious freedom and how that comes into these issues. while china and while issues of

freedom of expression and censorship are very much topical today, we are booking at this. broadly and i think that speaks to the issue. >> from our earlier conversation this week, my understanding is that the $15 million that was already spent in fiscal year 2008 goes to these 40 different countries and second engine technology as part of that. there is $5 million additional up for grabs now and more that you are expecting. circumvention has been a part of what you are doing. how is that different from the $15 million that the secretary referred to yesterday? is that a different part of money? >> let me break that down. on our side, there was in the fiscal year 2008 a grant from congress of $15 million.

some of that has been spent and some is in the pipelines and some is being developed. there is another $5 million for fiscal 2009 with there is a request for proposals that closes i think today or tomorrow. for fiscal 2010, there is another piece of money. that is the piece of it that i am involved in. the $15 million she preferred to, there are a branch of other programs within the government relating to some of the promotional things. our peace is separate. it is not just circumvention. it is not just one side. it is a lot about training. it is a lot about technology. it is about encouraging groups that are in danger. it is a lot about diplomacy, too. getting out there and making

sure that groups that are in trouble get a lifeline. we have a range of approaches and we are working with a wide range of groups. it is also not our interest for them to be identified. i want to speak in general terms because in reality, these are activities that governments are not often throw about. >> can you quantify how much of that goes to circumvention technology? >> i honestly do not know the answer to that. >> can we get back to china and the google issue? we have heard all the general one which from the podium previously from the secretary about we are going to talk to them. can you tell us exactly what is happening? have there been discussions with the ambassador here? as the ambassador there gone to the foreign ministry? can you give us the nuts and bolts about what has taken place? >> not at this time.

i can refer you to pj. [inaudible] >> the chinese are trying to talk about internet freedom. [inaudible] freedom their internet and china, how much control do you have? [inaudible] >> it is important to view the

human rights issue in china in the broadest frame. we have a long agenda which is an ongoing agenda. these are issues we continued to discuss and will continue to discuss. internet and cell phones are a means of expressing those concerns by chinese citizens within the country. most of gathering information about those issues in country. we support their efforts. we did not have the control over how that happens. the chinese government is very involved in overseeing that. that is one of the challenges we face. it is an area where we disagree with china. we think there should be an open internet global in nature and people should be able to express their opinions in the freest terms. this is going to be a continued

diplomatic discussion. it is also partly the responsibility of companies, individually and acting collectively, to figure out what their role will be. we need to be working with companies but we need to be cleared this is in the diplomatic and national interest of the united states to be promoting a free internet in china and the rest of the world. >> that is why one of the things the secretary announced that there are going to be high bubble meetings that are cochaired by the undersecretaries. >> [inaudible] >> if you could speak more correctly to the chinese foreign ministry post written statement in response to secretary clinton's speech. they said flatly that her insinuation that china restricts access to the internet and internet freedom runs contrary

to the fact that they ask that we do not make such groundless accusations. they also said flatly that it is harmful to china-u.s. relations. do you believe this has been harmful to china-u.s. relations and the you have any intention of tempering your criticism even in public on this matter given chinese on happen this? >> as the secretary said yesterday, there are a range of places with the u.s. and china have mutual interests. those interests will continue to be discussed. we will continue to work with them. there are places where we disagree. we are cooling to put out a report at the end of next month on human rights conditions. we put that out every year. it makes a range of comments about chinese human rights violations and problems. every year, the chinese government comes back and says we are interfering. it is the nature of the

relationship. there are issues where we disagree. we're going to continue to speak out strongly and clearly. we're going to have those discussions. that is what countries do with one another. " you do not think it does hurt the relationship. you disagree with that assessment. " i cannot characterize that. it is an inevitable part of the conversation. we talk about things where we disagree. quipped what exactly are the broad range of the true interests? it seems that you disagree on the internet, you disagree on tibet, tie 1, the human rights, -- taiwan. if there is one beyond afghanistan, i would be very interested in knowing what it is. >> there are a range of economic relationships that are important. strategic and security

conversations that are important. these are two very big important countries in the world. we talk about a wide range of things. there are some areas where we really are booking together. strategic and economic dialogue is about trying to strengthen those parts of the dialogue in part. part of it is to be sure that we are talking about the same things. >> this is not about china. although china could be involved. somebody who watched the speech was pointing out that singling out the egyptian blogger who had been in prison was significant because he was apparently going to go back to egypt. the question that it raised in this person's mind was whether this was a way of signaling that the u.s. would treat bloggers with the same sort of diplomatic status that they treat political dissidents of other kinds for

purposes. was that important and signaling a new way of treating this category of people? >> i think that part of what we now know about the 21st century is that the sentence -- dissidents often manifest that in different ways. blog are a form of 21st century dissidents. >> i was in egypt last week. i met with a number of bloggers including one who was arrested the next day. to me, it is important, as we have always done, to be championing the cases of those challenging official action.

this is part of the nature of what we need to be doing. this happens to be a case that occurred in the past two days. >> i would also point out that the sector records twice yesterday to small pamphlets that were passed out in the eastern bloc during the cold war. she specifically like and blogs and social networks to those. >> if you are planning anything at the united nations about this to win on [inaudible] ? >> as the secretary said in her speech, there is a discussion about opening up and making sure the internet is free. there is a second piece which is making sure that the internet

is protected. i think we are looking at both aspects of that and the un context. we were involved at geneva and the human rights council in september in cosponsoring a resolution on freedom of expression. part of that resolution made reference to the internet. we are very much aware of the best piece of it and continuing to use the un as a forum to make sure that freedom of expression is reinforced. there is also a tighter security in questions of privacy. we have to be mindful of the right of privacy and finding the right way on a global scale to find the right rules of the road for dealing with the negative and dangerous aspect. >> does that mean that the u.s. is going to call on other

nations to sign that council of europe convention or whatever the one she was referring to is that the u.s. is signatory to? and she going to call on more nations? who will be inflicted these consequences? >> we made reference to it and it is something we are looking at. i am not sure at this stage that i can tell you the next up is. >> how many countries are signatories to that? >> thank you. >> today in haiti, foreign aid donors worked to expand the pipeline of food, water, and medical care for survivors of last week's earthquake. the world food program says they have a fleet of trucks bringing in supplies from the dominican republic. so far, the agency says they have distributed more than 1.4

million food rations. the u.s. military is trying to patch up the industrial ports and port of prince to speed deliveries. searchers have rescued it least two people from the rubble today. a 22-year-old man and and 84- year-old woman who was described in critical condition. [inaudible] >> we do 5000 to 8000 per day. [inaudible] [unintelligible]

[speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language]

>> we are making sure that security is improved. >> next, president obama had a town hall meeting in ohio. then, secretary of state hillary clinton's speech on internet freedom. after that, the state department briefing on diplomatic efforts concerning worldwide internet access.