push ahead on major part of his domestic agenda including health care and climate change legislation. the president made these remarks at a town hall meeting just outside cleveland, ohio, where the main topic was the economy and jobs. this is about one hour 20 minutes. [applause] >> hello, everybody. [applause] >> hollow, ohio. [applause] thank you, very much. please, relax. [laughter] >> we are going to be here for a little bit. take 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. 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, if it is great to be

here. thank you so much for your great hospitality. it is just nice being out of washington. there are some nice people in washington. they can drive you crazy. am i wrong, sherry? [laughter] vilege 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 what do you happen to those folks withheld insuranc i took this up because i want to ease the burdens of all the families and small businesses that cannot afford to pay an outrageous rates. i want to protect mothers and fathers and children who are targeted by some of the worst practices in their insurance industry that i have heard time and time again. [applause]

let me dispel the notion that we were focused on that and not on the economy. first of all, all i think about is how we will create jobs in this area. i think about how we will get banks lending again. i have been doing that the entire year. folks like sherry and martin and betty have as well. but i also know that health care is part of the drag on our economy. it is part of the eroding security that middle-class families feel. here's the good news. we have gotten pretty far down the road. but i have to admit. we hit a bit of a buzz saw this week. [laughter] i also know that part of the reason is that this process was

so long and so drawn out. this is what happens in congress. it is an ugly process. 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. profits from that. it turns out that it can be administered in such a way where these loans go directly to the students. if you do that, you are saving several billion dollars that can be put back into the system. we want to get that finalized. that will be an enormous boost. one thing i have to say, however, 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 we can reduce the inflation in higher education. the fact is that the only thing that has gone up faster in cost than health care is, guess what.

higher education. if we are not thinking about ways to curve the inflation, even if we put more money in, what that money is buying becomes less and less. we're trying to create -- we're trying to find creative ways for universities to do more with less. state budgets got into a hole and it became harder so they have to make up on the tuition side. their general costs of operating have gone up in ways that i think we can improve. so we will be working on that as well. all right? i have a gentleman and then i have to go back to you. this gentleman right here in the tie. you look sharp. [laughter] 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 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. the right to have the shot. for some reason or other this what can we do about it? >> let me address all three of your issues. first, 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 do not make some changes. there it is good news.

compared to medicare, social security is in reasonably good shape. with some relatively small adjustments, you can have that solvent for a long time. i know people are concerned about it. social security we can fix. in terms of the cola, it stands for the cost of living allowance. it is 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 did not 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 because prices did not go up in

the aggregate. that does not mean that individual folks were not being pinched by higher heating prices or what have you. but on average, prices went down. here's what we did. 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 seeing, and listened to this gentleman back here. i truly appreciate what he's going through. but in this instance, d inherited the patent from enron. now they are calling a a roil,

but it is really a gate to keep people out. are there any programs? this company was identified. i want to bring this to the united states. this is not about money for me. this is about bringing jobs. he should have a right to work. >> let me respond. >> is there any federal program that can help me? i just want to borrow the money to create this factory and create these jobs. >> i do not know about the particular situation, so i will speak generally to it. if you want to get one of my team your card, they can follow up. one of the things that we have done or that we have seen coming out of the financial crisis is

that the banks are still not lending to small businesses. the mayor and i talked about this. the business owners that i talked to will confirm this. if you ask why -- if you ask the banks why, they will say that it is a combination of -- in some cases, demand really is down businesses do not have as many customers as they used to. that is some cases. but, in some cases, you have very profitable businesses that are ready to grow and invest and have a proven track record. have a proven track record. looking over their shoulder . 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 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. ♪ ♪

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

>> next, secretary of state hillary clinton's speech on internet freedom. after that, the state department briefing on the diplomatic efforts concerning worldwide internet access. then the house hearing on the force could shootings. -- on the fort hood shootings. >> abigail adams had to remind john adams to remember the ladies when creating a new government. dolly madison had to encourage her once shy husband. this weekend, the intimate lives

of the founding fathers. thomas fleming profiles the women who played a central part in creating our country. part of this weekend's "book tv " on c-span2. the state of the union address, wednesday night. our coverage starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. you can also listen live on your iphone with the c-span radio app. >> next, secretary of state clinton called on china to live web surfing restrictions. she also remarks on several other countries that have tightened internet rules, including egypt, iran, and saudia arabia. this comes after google reported several serious cyber attacks originating from china. this is just over an hour.

>> i want to welcome you to an event that we will long remember. we're privileged to witness a major foreign-policy speech by the secretary of state. i encourage you to stay for a panel discussion led by the director of the secretaries policy planning staff. this is the perfect setting for a discussion about freedom. the museum is not a classic museum. it has lots of history, but its purpose is to promote the freedoms that allow that history to be freely and fully told. it is told 1st by newspapers, then by radio, television, and now by the web. the museum exists to illustrate values embodied in the first amendment. they are five freedoms that have been ours for centuries and that we hold as der going into the internet 21st century, as we did at the time of the

revolution. the museum is also about honoring reporters who died in the line of duty, women and men who gave their lives so that others might know the truth. there's a beautiful space on the third floor of this building dedicated to them. we at the museum are particularly grateful to you, madam secretary, for having presided over the original dedication of the memorial when the museum was in arlington and you were first lady. the location and do these have changed, but your support remains. we truly appreciate it. i am also delighted to welcome you here in another role as the president of the foundation dedicated to the democratic ideal of informed, engaged communities. we are a major supporter of the museum, just as we support free expression and journalism excellence.

more than 50 years ago, jack knight said the purpose of the great newspaper was to inform and eliminate the minds of its readers so that the people might determine their own true interest. those values resonate today as the tools of the networked world help to shed light on social problems and opportunities and empower democratic action. the commission on the information needs of communities in a democracy is a project of the aspen institute. it is also chaired by the former solicitor ted olson. it released its report at the museum last october. a central conclusion of the report is that internet freedom and universal access our tools of a functioning democracy. they function together. they should be seen as a common goal. we support the freedoms and access to information that are at the core of the american

experience. those freedoms make us who we are. we should welcome the opportunity to let them define us. we are here today to address that theme. it is with pride and great anticipation that i present to you the secretary of state of the united states, hillary clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much for that kind introduction and you and your colleagues leadership at this important institution. it is a pleasure to be here at the newseum. the newseum is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms. i am grateful for the opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to challenges of the 21st century. although i cannot see all of you because and said things 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 knowledge charles cooper -- charles overby, and my former colleagues in the senate. both of them worked for passage of the voice at that speaks to congress'and the american people's commitment to internet freedom. it is a commitment that crosses party lines and branches of government. also, i am told here as well are senator brownback and rep sanchez, many representatives of the diplomatic corps, participants in our international visitor a leadership program on internet freedom from china, colombia, iran, lebanon, and cordoba. i also want to acknowledge the

president of the aspen institute. he was recently named to our broadcasting board of governors and 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. before i begin, i want to speak briefly about haiti. 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 hardships. but there are few precedents to the situation we're facing in port-au-prince. communication networks have played a critical role in our response. they were decimated and in many places totally destroyed. in the hours after the earthquake, we worked with partners in the private sector to first set up the text haiti

campaign so that mobile phone users in the united states could donate via text messages. that initiative has been a showcase for the generosity of the american people. thus far, it has 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 get communications up and going. the government could not talk to each other, what was left of it. the civilian and military leadership were severely impacted. the technology committee has set up interactive maps to help us identify needs and target resources. on monday, a 7-year-old girl and two women were pulled from the rubble of collapsed supermarket by an american search and rescue team after they sent a text message calling

for help. 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. we can respond in real time as well. americans are eager to help in the aftermath of a disaster. 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 our children can take out the tools that many carry every day and transmit this discussion to billions across the world. in many respects, information

has never been so free. there are more ways to spread more ideas to more people than any other moment in history. even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people to discover new fax and making government more accountable. during his visit to china in november, 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. he said that the more freely information flows, the stronger the societies become. he spoke about how to access to information helps citizens hold their own governments accountable. it generates new ideas. it encourages creativity and entrepreneurship. the united states'belief in that is what brings me here today. 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 nuclear power can energize a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technology is that they support can be harnessed for good or for ill. the same networks that work for dan also allow al qaeda to incite hatred against the innocent. 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 an

increase in threats to the free flow of information. some countries have stepped up their censorship of the internet. in vietnam, access to popular social networking sites have suddenly disappeared. last friday in egypt, 30 bloggers and activists were detained. one member of the group was thankfully no longer in prison is with us today. 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 human welfare of the world 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. we recognize that the world information infrastructure will

become what we and others make of it. 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 marble on the front of this building. 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. at the time, americans faced a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence. 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. years later, one of my heroes, eleanor roosevelt, worked to have these principles adopted as the cornerstone of the universal declaration of human

rights. they have provided a lodestar to every succeeding generation, inviting us, and enabling us to move forward in the face of uncertainty. as technology moves 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. in my speech on human rights in 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 assist in the movement of people or resources. 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. that is why we believe it is critical that the 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 criticized 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, the government censors somewhere are working furiously to embrace my words from the record of history. but history itself has already condemned these tactics. two month ago i was in germany to celebrate the 20th

anniversary of the fall of the berlin wall. the leaders gathered at that ceremony pay tribute to the courageous men and women who made the case against oppression. by circulating small pamphlets, these leaflets questioned the claims and intentions of dictatorships in eastern bloc. many people paid dearly for distributing them. their words helped to affect the iron curtain. the berlin wall defined an entire era. today, remnants of the wall sit inside this museum, where they belong. the new iconic infrastructure of our age is the internet. instead of division, it stands for connection. even as networks spread through nations around the globe, virtual walls are cropping up in place of visible walls.

some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent people from accessing portions of the world's networks. they've expunged words, names, and freezes from search engine results. they have violated the privacy of citizens to engage in non- violent political speech. these actions contravened the universal declaration of human rights which tell us that all people have the right to speak, receive, and impart information and ideas to any media and regardless of frontiers. with the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. beyond this partition, viral videos and posts are becoming symbols of our day. governments are targeting independent thinkers who use these tools.

in the demonstrations that followed iran's presidential election, cellphone footage of a 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 and iran were singled out for retribution. 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, iranian people have inspired the world. it is redefining how technology is used to spread truth and expose injustice. 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 qaeda, who are using the internet to promote the mass murder of innocent people across the world. hate speech that targets individuals on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation is reprehensible. it is an unfortunate fact that these issues are growing challenges that the international community must confront together. 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 there online actions from their real-world identities. these challenges must not become an excuse for government to systematically it violates 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 right of individuals to commune or not with their creator. that is one channel of communication that does not rely upon technology. the freedom of worship also speaks to the universal right to come together with those who share your values and your vision for humanity. in our history, those gatherings took place in churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples. today they may also take place on line. the internet can help to 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. as we look for ways to expand dialogue, the internet holds such tremendous promise. we have already begun connecting students in the united states

with young people and muslim communities around the world to discuss local challenges. we will continue using this tool to foster discussion between individuals from different religious communities. some nations, however, have coopted the internet as a tool to target and silence people of faith. last year in saudi arabia, a man spent months in prison for blogging about christianity. a harvard study found that the saudi government blocked many web pages about hinduism, christianity, and even islam. countries including vietnam and china employed similar tactics to restrict access to religious information. 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. 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 of hundreds of millions of people living without the benefit of these technologies. in our world, 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.

i hope their competitors and foreign governments will pay attention to this trend. the situation involving google has attracted a great deal of interest. we look to the chinese authorities to conduct a thorough review of the cyber intrusions that led google to make its announcement. we look for that investigation and its results to be transparent. the internet has already been a source of tremendous progress in china, and it is fabulous. there are so many people in china now on line, but countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of internet users risk blowing themselves off from the progress of the next century. the united states and china have different views on this issue, and we intend to address the differences candidly and consistently in the context of

our positive, a cooperative, and comprehensive relationship. . . asymmetrical access is one of the leading causes of interstate conflict. when we face serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it is

critical that people have access to the same set of facts and opinions. as it stands, americans can consider information presented by foreign governments. we do not block your attempts to the u.s.. citizens and societies that practice censorship lack exposure to outside opinions. in north korea, for example, the government has tried to completely isolate its citizens from outside opinions. this lopsided access increases the likelihood of conflict and the probability that small disagreements could escalate. i hope that responsible governments with an interest in global stability will work with us to address such imbalances. this issue is just more about claiming the 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 upon will provide comprehensive search results and act as responsible stewards of their own personal information. firms that earned the confidence of those countries and basically provided that kind of service will prosper in the global marketplace. i really believe that those who lose the confidence will eventually lose customers. no matter where you live, people want to believe that what they call it into the internet will not be used against them. censorship should not be in any way except it by any company from anywhere. in america, american companies need to make a principled stand. disney's to be part of our national brand. i'm confident that consumers worldwide will reward companies that follow those principles. we are reinvigorating the task

force as a form for addressing press to internet freedom around the world. we are urging u.s. media companies to take a corrective role in challenging foreign government's demands for censorship and surveillance. government has an obligation to help deal with this. we need to consider what is right. we are encouraged by the work is being done through the global network initiative. a voluntary effort by technology companies working with non- governmental organizations, experts, and social investment firms to respond to government requests for censorship. the initiative goes beyond statements of principles and promotes real accountability and transparency. as part of our commitment to support responsible private- sector engagement, the state department will convene a high- level meeting next month cochaired the undersecretaries to bring together firms that

provide network services. we want to have a partnership in addressing this 21st century challenge. pursuing the freedoms i have talked about today is the right thing to do. i also believe is the smart thing to do. by advancing this agenda, we online our principles, our economic goals, and our strategic priorities. we need to work towards a world in which access to networks and information brings people closer together and expands the definition of the global community. given the magnitude of the challenges we are facing, we need people of around the world to pool their knowledge and creativity to help rebuild the global economy. to protect our environment, to defeat a violent extremism, and build a future in which every human being can live up to it

and realize his or her potential. but we close by asking you to remember the little girl who was pulled from the rubble on monday in haiti. she is alive, she was reunited with her family. she will have the chance to grow. these networks took a voice that was buried and spread it to the world. no nation, and a group, no individual should stay buried in the rubble of repression. we cannot stand by white people are separated from the human family -- by while people are separated from the human family. let us recommit ourselves to this cause. let us make these technologies a force for real progress the world over. let us go forward together to champion the freedoms for our time.

for our young people deserve every opportunity we can give them. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, madam secretary. the secretary has agreed to answer some questions. there will be three microphones in the audience. if he would make for questions short, we would appreciate it.

>> madam secretary, i am robert gale, i am with northern virginia community college. you talk about anonymity online and how we have to prevent that and you also talk about censorship by governments. having a zeal of anonymity is actually quite beneficial. -- veil of anonymity. are you looking to have a balance between that and the in this is on censorship? >> absolutely. this is one of the challenges that we face. on the one hand, anonymity for texting exploitation of children.

-- protects the exploitation of children. on the other hand, if protect the free expression of government. anonymity allows the theft of intellectual property. it also permits people to come together in settings that gives them some basis for free expression without identifying themselves. none of this will be easy. but as a fair statement. -- that is a fair statement. we all have different needs, rights and responsibilities. we should err on the side of openness and everything we can to create that. ought we recognize that there will be exceptions. how we go after this is now what we are requesting.

we are asking for experts to help us in this. we need to the guidance of technology experts. most of them are younger than 40 but not all. we need the companies that do this and we need the dissident voices to have actually lived on the front lines so that we can try to work through the best way to make that balance work. >> right over here, yes. >> i am the global freedom of expression officer at freedom house. you spoke about a business and reliant on them to do the right thing. the coal business is to make a profit. -- the goal of businesses to make a profit. what kind of teeth will you put into this? what role does the world trade organization play? how will you encourage them to

do the right thing? >> well, this is one of the issues that we want to have a very vigorous discussion about. i know that asking business which is in business to make a profit to do the right thing is not always translated into practical practice. on the other hand, there is a broader context. companies that don't follow the sanitary and hygiene procedures of the prior generation pray -- pay a price for it. the food and other products that end up on the shelves of consumers should be safe because individual consumers in an interconnected economy cannot possibly exercise the vigilance on their own. when it comes to censorship, had been at international establishment of rules over the internet connectivity and trying to protect the basic freedoms i discussed is in the long term interest of business.

i would argue is also in the interest of governments. i used the example of the fall of the berlin wall. it is very hard to keep information out. it was hard to keep it out in a prior age. it is harder now. trying to adjust to that, work with that, and learn from that, about what could be done better, will challenge every single government in the world. i think that business as a driver of economic growth has to have that in mind both when they go in to countries and when they confront the kind of censorship that we are hearing about are around the world. it is particularly acute for

the technology companies, the media companies, obviously. it is not in any way limited to that. other companies are facing censorship as well. this is an issue that we have to talk about and to try to find as much common ground and then keep claiming more common ground as we go forward. >> we have a question over here on the left. >> thank you. i am the director of the website promoting civil rights in libya. we have been attacked and hacked to many times. and how can you help those forces which did not have the technology or the money to protect themselves? the hackers silenced the voices of the freedom of expression.

>> this is one of the issues that we are debating and we are looking for ideas on how we can answer this in a positive way. after i take the last question, the director of my policy planning unit inside of the state department and the former dean of the woodrow wilson school who has written a lot of doubt in your connectivity will be leading a discussion. -- about interconnected pity and how we have to be looking at the world as a network reality it will be leading a discussion. give your ideas, suggestions, cautions, worries will stay and get into an in-depth discussion about that.

>> while your initiative takes some time, just recently the government sentenced several borders to 15 years in prison. what does your office plan to do to deal with such a situation in vietnam? -- just recently the government sentenced several bloggers to 15 years in prison. >> we do not approve of the treatment of those people, the buddhist monks and nuns who have also been harassed. the and non has made a lot of progress. it is moving with alacrity into the future. -- vietnam is moving towards progress. living in that country.

we don't believe the government should be afraid of commentary that is internal. in fact, if you disagree with what a blogger says, aren't you with them. -- argue with them. put out contrary information. present the flaws in the argument. i hope that vietnam will move more in that direction. it goes hand in hand with the progress we have seen in the last few years there. >> madam secretary, you mentioned that u.s. companies have to do the right thing, not just what is good for the profit. what if i am a company and i have a subsidiary in china and the chinese government is coming after my people? what can the state department do?

>> we speak out on those individual cases. we're hoping to engage in a very candid and constructive conversation with the chinese government. we have had a positive year up very open discussions with our chinese counterparts. we have established a foundation of understanding. we disagree on important issues with them, they disagree on important issues with us. we want to encourage and support increasing openness in china because we believed that it will further add to that do not growth and the democratization on local level that we see occurring in china. -- we believe that it will add to the growth and democratization on a local level

that we see occurring in china. on individual cases, we continue to speak out. on the broader set of issues, we hope to have the kind of better understanding and changes in the approach is currently being taken. >> thank you. >> when you talk about social network, we try to address the issue of use. would you be open to the youth forum? one of the reason that they get radicalized is because it don't have a way to express themselves. would you be open to those ideas? >> yes, we would.

we have been expanding our outreach, particularly to muslim youth. i agree that not only young people in the moslem world but young people across the world -- in the muslim world but young people across the world are increasingly disaffected from the government. many people are interconnected through the internet. in america, the average young person spends 8 hours a day with media. think about that. this is more time than they spend in school, with their families. if you think about the power of this information connection to young people, i don't think it

should cause panic. i don't think that we should try to stop it and prevent it. we should figure out how to utilize it better. how were values passed around a millennia ago? how were values to indicated in a home? -- communicated in the home? now they are being communicated by the internet. we cannot stop it. let's figure out how better to use it, participate in it, and to focus on the needs of young people. they're looking for information, they're looking for answers. at least until now in most cultures that i'm aware of, despite all of the time that young people spend with technology, when they are asked to do they look to for guidance about values, they still say their families. if families feel disconnected from their highly connected young people and don't know

what the young people are doing on line, then we see the problems that can result. there are so many manipulators' online right now. not just stoking the anxiety and the fears of muslim youth but all kinds people everywhere. we have our own work to do not just through our government but through our families, through our education systems and every other institution to make sure we understand the power of this technology and to engage with young people. >> thank you for inviting us to apply for grants. i am interested in knowing what

are the procedures, what does the agency need to do with this? >> in addition to our panel, we have a lot of members of our team that are working on these initiatives. we can certainly connect up if we invited you, we know how to find you. we want to make sure that we can get affirmation about these programs. >> -- we can get information about these programs. >> i would encourage you to stay for the panel. i'm sure some of the questions will get answered. let's do one last question over here on the far left. >> hello.

thank you for your program. at howard university, we are interested in particular aspects of the internet with respect to the digital divide. your story about the young girl being pulled out of the trouble. -- of the rubble. this reminds me of how many others could have been saved if they had the technology. we are interested in knowing in terms of access. not only internet freedom but free internet for all. what can be done right now for haiti. >> as you know, that is a continuing issue for us.

we have 4 billion cell phones. the cellphone is becoming the principal tool for communications. there is texting and other forms of communication that it can perform. many businesses and non- governmental organizations are passing them out at low cost. we have to keep incentivizing end encouraging the technology to be as low cost as possible so it can be as ubiquitous as possible. we have made tremendous progress. 10 years ago, we talked a lot about the digital divide. there are still questions of access, questions of cost. obviously, we have to recognize that a lot of the search engines are run by for-profit companies. there are lots of ways to try to encourage more universal access.

that is the overall policy of the obama administration. thank you. >> thank you, madam secretary. >> thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> the chinese government reacted to the remarks by saying that the american government should stick to the facts. >> welcome to the state department. we are very pleased to have albatrosses and the assistant secretary for human rights. -- alex ross and the assistant secretary for human rights. they are here to talk about the comments made by the secretary>>

good afternoon, everyone. it is a pleasure to be with you. i want to take a few minutes to give it some context to the remarks yesterday by secretary clinton. i thought was appropriate that if it was not the day it was off by one day. it was a year to 8 day that she gave that speech. it was basically a year to 8 day a day. to me, that was significant because one of the things that secretary of state is figuring out the way in which we can modernize our statecraft. we have learned a lot over the course of this year. we have learned some things that are very positive about the role technology can play in our foreign-policy. we have nothing to celebrate

rainout as relates to haiti. -- as it relates to haiti. at think it should be noted that it was at a secretaries direction that the state department said at the program to text to send money. -- set up the program to send money to haiti by text. we are also looking at the role that digital to acacias networks could play to get to the american message out. we are no longer bound by the strictures of broadcast media. the president in cairo was able to reach many people and reached about effectively. we are no longer bound by the strictures of a traditional broadcast media. people were able to get matchups on their cell phones. we have also learned some other things. in the past year, we have seen a surge in al qaeda and other organizations using global

networks to recruit young people. we have seen up or tearing government -- we have seen authoritarian networks continually infiltrates, mature, and shut down that works. -- monitor them, and ultimately to shut them down. this was seen in iran. i am sure that you 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 is that according to the open net initiative, 21 countries engage in extreme censorship or filtering of content on the internet. this is not include countries that sensor things like pornography.

bu31% of the world's population lives in countries where governments heavily censored the internet for political content. we find this data staggering. that is part of what prompted yesterday's speech by the secretary. that is part of why we are in elevating internet freedom to something that is more central to our statecraft. this does not just go to the information freedom point but also what kind of world we want to live in. do we want to live in a world with one intranet? -- 1 internet. one common knowledge base from--

draw. board to we want to make sure based on what country that you live-in? -- or do we want to live at in a country where you can have many sources. many know me as obama's technology policy guide during the campaign. what i have release spent the last 10 years doing is focusing on the digital divide. i started a nonprofit in a basement of that grew from being four guys with no money and a handful of ideas to the world's largest digital divide organization. to me, yesterday's announcement was a shift in the history of the internet from the primary concern of the internet being digital divide, being an issue of access. can one get access to the internet? now today, the number one

problem that we have to dress as relates to global truncations is the internet open? -- the number one issue that we have to deal with is is the internet open? is it uncensored? the last thing that i will highlight before turning it over to my colleague is that i want to highlight the role of shared responsibility. the secretary spoke very directly to the private sector. not just american global sector. this is indicative of the fact that this is not just a government to government concern. one of the things that is important about internet freedom is that it really lives at the convergence of security issues, human rights issues, and economic issues. it is not one of those three things, it is all of them. the private-sector does not play a secondary role, they have a primary role. she spoke about some of the initiatives that are out there

which are working which i know will be described. what i would highlight is that this is not something that we will be engaging on in a government to government basis what an but also in the private sector. >> i just want to say briefly that the speech yesterday is really part of a trilogy. in the past five weeks, the secretary has spoken about human rights, democracy, development, and the link between the three. she spoke about development. she spelled that out more. the speech fits within that framework. our approach to human rights and democracy promotion development is one of principle engagement. we will engage with the world and we will engage in multiple ways.

this is one way in which that engagement will take place both diplomatically in terms of technical assistance, training. we will be actively involved in promoting the notion of internet freedom. she also spoke about universal standards and the fact that there is a global discussion. the notion of free expression is that there is one standard of freedom, one standard of free expression that applies across the board to every country. everyone should be entitled to the same access of information. it is very hard to change countries from outside.

when we talk about democracy, it is a broad notion that says that in power in civil society, strengthening the press, giving women more power, creating an internal glitch people can change their societies, these tools are a way that people are communicating within their own societies and with the rest of the world. -- creating an environment in which people can change their societies. what we are trying to do. we are talking about linking human rights, democracy, and development. >> on china, i'm wondering if you have any reaction or response to the chinese reaction hawaiian born to the speech.

range of relations with the chinese there is a lot of issues on the table. there are some issues where we are working cooperatively together and some where we disagree. this is an area where we will be part of the dialogue. this is an area where we really have differences. >> how is the human rights dialogue going? >> to my mind, it is part of a strategic dialogue. it is part of a broader discussion. >> it does not seem like you are willing to talk about it. >> but is not true. we're discussing what the agenda will be and the form of the discussions. there will be a discussion of the range of issues.

dialogue in the coming months. >> yes, the text message engine donations helped -- text message donations helped. the government brought in hand- held radios. that is kind of old technology. is the thought being given to building up in the cellphone capacity or something like that where you won't have to rely on a transistor radio? >> we have a task force that is focused on technology. we are working very closely and we believe that this is a priority to be able to restore telecommunications to the island. and not just that people can communicate with each other but

mobile platforms to help people connect to services. >> sort as a general question. in terms as carrying out what of the secretary talked about in the internet freedom, there has been some discussion about making internet freedom a trade issue. some of the software that allows the chinese to do would say to the sacha supplied by american companies. -- to do what they would do is actually supplied by american companies.

i know the state car and has set aside money to support these efforts. there's also gif a initiative. is there any thought being given to giving this? >> our approach is involved and some of the grant making and support the current jobs. lots of groups are trying to break the fire wall. there is not a silver bullet for that. we have a request for proposals that is out i closes today or tomorrow. we welcome any group that has a piece of this. we look at this like the venture firms that try a lot of different things. everything will not work. we have to try different things in different countries. technology is a piece, training is a piece. we have to address this in a

multifaceted way. everyone is welcome to apply and there is more money coming down the pike. at how i>> i think that the secretary laid out a great addition for what we will do. there will be a hold government approach to this in addition to what we are doing at the state department. >> are you saying that this a u.s. thing -- >> we are elevating internet freedom as a matter of our foreign policy. we will be working with our partners to make sure that we are very aggressive. >> does this mean actively

subverting the chinese firewall? >> i will not expand on that comment. funding for groups that are trying to get around the far wall. >> you are finding that? -- i will not make that comment. >> funding for groups that are trying to get around the fire wall. you are funding that? >> there are groups that are trying to exert their freedom of expression. in many of those countries, the governments would rather not have a full discussion of their own actions or of human rights were 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 work with soviet dissidents 35 years ago. some governments will characterize this in a way that you did. from my perspective, this is a question about giving people more power in their societies, speaking to one another,

speaking to the rest of the world. >> you seem to be describing our relationship with china in a similar way that our relationship was with the soviet union. >> i did not mention china. i just said that some governments feel they need to restrict access to the internet. they need to make it possible for the expression of freedom. people should be able to expressed their opinions. there should be a strong civil society with in this country

that is able to raise issues of concern. >> let me extend on that by just pointing out that we are focusing on one aspect of the internet freedom in the conversation at this point. when in fact the secretary laid out a broad amount of issues within which she defines internet freedoms. one of the things that causes a great deal of concern is countries where young women who are "caught" using social media are subject to honor beatings and killings. while circumvention is one aspect, so too are making sure it is not just young men who can

be a part of the digital age. it is also the case, she pointed out religious freedom and how that intersects into these issues. while china and while issues of freedom of expression and censorship are very much topical today, we are looking at this very broadly and that speaks to the issue. >> my understanding that the $15 million that has already been spent goes to these four different countries and circumvention technology is part of that. there are 5 million additional that is up for grant and more that you are expecting. circumvention is part of what you're doing. what is this in relation to what the secretary was talking about? is this a different amount of

money? >> on our side, there was a grant from congress of the shifting million. some of that has been spent, some of that is in the pipeline, some of that has been fully developed. some money that was in request for proposals. "min fiscal 10, there is anothr amount of money. that is a piece of it than i am involved in. i think that of the 15 million that she referred to, there was a range of other programs that were related to the promotional programs. our piece is release separate. it is not just contention. it is a lot about training.

it is about technology. it is about encouraging danger. it is a lot about diplomacy. we need to make sure that we provide a lifeline. we have a range of thoughts, a range of approaches, and we are working with a long range of groups. i want to speak in general terms because the reality is that these are activities that the government is concerned about. >> can you talk about of the funds over which you are in charge? >> i don't have an answer. can we talk about china? we have heard a lot of the general language from the podium. we will talk to them and have negotiations. can you tell us exactly what is happening.

there have been discussions. is this a disaster going to the foreign ministry? can you give us the nuts and bolts on what levels this has taken place? >> we have been talking and religious freedom with the chinese for many many years. now the chinese are crying out for internet freedom. as far as freedom in china or human-rights, how much control do you have as to the technologies in china?

what technology companies are in china? >> it is important to view this issue in china in the broadest frame. we had an agenda which is an ongoing agenda. these are issues that we continue to discuss. the internet is a means of expressing those issues by chinese citizens within the country and gathering information about those issues by people in this country. also a way for them to express themselves to the rest of the world. we support their effort. we certainly don't have the control. the chinese government is your involved. but as one of the challenges that we face. we had a disagreement with the

chinese government. our opinion is that there should be an open internet. people should be able to express their views in the most free terms. this will be a continued diplomatic discussion. it is also part of the responsibilities of companies. they are acting collectively to figure out what their role is. we need to be working with companies. we also need to be promote the free internet in china. >> the secretary announced that there will be high-level meetings that will be cochaired by the undersecretary. >> can we ask you to speak directly to the written statement in response to secretary clinton's speech?

they said that her insinuation that china restricts access or restrict the internet runs contrary to the facts. they asked not to make such groundless accusations. they said flatly that it is harmful to china-u.s. relations. do you believe that this has been harmful? do you have any intentions of tempering your criticism even in public over this matter given the chinese and happiness? >> i think as the secretary said yesterday, there are many places where the u.s. and china have mutual interests and they will continue to be discussed, we will continue to work with them. we have places where we will disagree. we will put out a report at the end of the month on human rights conditions.

every year, we put this out and it makes a range of comments about chinese human rights violations at problems. every year they claim interference. this is the nature of the relationship. there are issues where we will disagree. we will continue to speak out strongly and clearly and we will have those discussions. but as part of what countries do. >> you don't think it has hurt the relationship? >> i cannot characterize that. it is an inevitable part of the conversation that we talk about things where we disagree and we try to find ways to approach things differently. >> what exactly are the mutual interests? it's seems to me that you disagree on the internet, iran, tibet, taiwan, human rights. where are these areas of convergence?

>> there are a range of strategic and security conversations. these are very big countries in the world. there are some countries where we are working together. there is an economic dialogue. part of it is also to be sure about the things where we disagree. >> this is not about china. there is a guy that is going to go back to egypt. the question was whether this was a way of signaling and that

they would treat a dissident and loggers with the same kind of -- and dissident bloggers in the same way that they treat criminals of other kinds. is this important in terms of treating this category of people? >> the dissidents manifest their opinions on the global communication networks. bloggers 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 looking

at the cases where they are challenging official actions. this is part of the nature of rolling need to be doing. >> the secretary referenced twice in her speech these templates that were passed down in the eastern bloc during the cold war. she specifically likened the social networks to -- >> how long has this been going on.

there is discussion about making sure the internet is free. we want to make sure that there is privacy and that it is not used in ways that is such a mental to security. we were involved at the human rights council in september in cosponsoring a resolution on freedom of expression. part of that made reference to the internet. we are very much aware of that piece of it and continuing to use this as a form. we want to make sure that this is reinforced. there is questions of privacy. we have to be mindful of the right of privacy and trying to find the right ways on a global

scale to find the right rules of the road. >> does that mean that they will call on other nations to have the council of europe? will she called on more nations? who will be conflicting? >> it is something we are looking at. i am not sure that i can tell you at this stage what the next step is. >> how many countries are signatories? >> a few. >> thank you very much. c-span[captioning performed by

national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> after that, president obama had a town hall meeting. >> this weekend, john mueller believes the chance of a nuclear attack is smaller than most people think. he presents his case in "atomic obsession." will also look into the fact of the automobile on the global society. you can find the entire schedule at booktv.org. >> wednesday, president obama delivers his first state of the union address to congress laying out husis vision for the countr.

the state of the union address, wednesday night. you can listen to the address live on your iphone with the cspan radion app. >> now testimony for the cochairs on the fort hood shootings. the co-chair is the former chief of naval operations. this is about two hours and 10 minutes. >> good morning. on november 5th, 2009, a gunman opened fire at a soldier in fort hood, texas. the soldiers were preparing for deployment to combat zones overseas. texas. in line at the center were soldiers deployed overseas. by completing administrative task.

13 people were killed and 43 were wounded. on the u.s. army base on united states soil. the army major edell hasan was an active duty army psychiatrist as of today his be in charge an article cxviii of the uniform code of military justice and with 13 counts of murder under article lxxx of the same uniform code with 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. i am troubled by the fact that over a period some of the circumstances have led to the shooting or the results of military officers not following existing policies and procedures. specifically there are numerous stories in the press, npr, ap, msnbc, cnn and fox news and

others that the alleged shooters raiders in senior raiders failed to document negative information in his official record. we have questions, why did it happen, could it have been prevented, was the response adequate and more importantly to ensure that everything possible is done that this does not happen again. several task force and panels examining these very questions. today we hear from the first of these groups to issue a report. the independent review on the programs and the response and oversight on the alleged perpetrator fired -- prior to the shooting. secretary gates take two senior leaders from the secretary of