force in haiti has been led very successfully by brazil. host: and they were there when the earthquake happened. guest: very active in the first efforts to help the haitian people. and cuba, we work with the brazilians to lead the recovery effort. it is an increasingly wealthy country and they've experienced the need. don't take the american lead all the time. bring in other countries and work out a common approach, a common policy. host: he is with us this morning for your calls and comments by twitter and e-mail are welcome. the telephone numbers are on your screen. we will get to your calls momentarily. on the issue of the war on drugs and mexico, and issue that plays out regularly on the screens of american television's, and this

article -- "what is spanish for quagmire?" . failing but the mexican drug order the mceuen drug war is a costly un winnable and predicated on the mets. there has been distorted statistics to bed history how -- there have been distorted statistics. will the new efforts be any better in helping mexico in their drug wars? guest: does not seem so. the basic question is less the transportation of drugs than the consumption of drugs, the purchasing of drugs in the united states and western europe. until we deal with the current until we deal with the current -- the issue of consumption, we h supply. many believe that mexico is fighting the u.s. problem.

drugs are still reaching the u.s. market. guest: if we don't participate, it creates a griddle next national security issue? guest: we need to participate but there are many things united states could do like to deal with the flow of arms out of most mexicans are being killed by weapons exporter from the united states. where is all the money going? why can we open a bank accounts and find out where the money from this terrible curse is actually going? host: is it your view that drug consumption has bite in the last few years? guest: very much so. we have a much wider variety of stuff that people can buy, unfortunately. host: first up is syracuse on and democrats . caller: 01 to ask about haiti

and the bill clinton policy and that record -- i wanted to ask about haiti and the bill clinton policy in that regard. there's an issue about the phone company privatization and bill clinton wanted the company to become privatized. there is a move toward pushing jean-paul aristide out. jean-paul aristide out. he got away can you speak to that. can't comment on how much president aristide has in his bank account. bill clinton is the special

envoy to to the united nations to haiti. the clintons know haiti and they were there when they were younger. he has been there during the recent crisis. we need to look forward rather than going backward and looking at the decisions taken back in the 1990's. we need a comprehensive rebuilding program that must be multilateral in which president clinton will play a part but not be the leader. host: baltimore is next, independent line. caller: the united states jumped an end -- should jump in and help other countries. the united nations should do it and other countries should come in. when something happens, the country that wants to take over instead of the united states should say that we don't need our help guest: i think the approach should be moultrie collateral and we should do more perplexing for a crisis. there will be another earthquake or some money someplace in the world. the united nations should have a

command structure that is ready to go into place and work with a number of countries and they can provide different kinds of aid and assistance. that should be ready to go immediately and not debate who will be involved. host: next call is from portsmouth, rhode island. caller: our relationship with cuba seems to be so heavy handed. they are communists but there are avoidance of corporatism. we do business with china, the largest communist country in the world. that makes me wonder -- we do treat everyone different. a lot of it is for our own interest. it seems rather odd to me. hostguest: the embargo from junt is counter productive. it is the lifeline for the

castro brothers. every time there's a problem in cuba, bacon said it is not because of democracy, they can say is because of the united states embargo. lifting the embargo some say would lift the castro brothers out of power. host: what is the policy been there? guest: the president has been a possible for families to go back and be reunited. travel is easier but the embargo is a critical question for the island as a poor island and it should be wealthy. with the embargo in place, it never will they. host: our democrats line is next. caller: the policy has been wrong. haiti was destroyed before. they cannot grow anything, they had no crops. we knew that 20 and 40 years

ago that place was in trouble. i don't know why you say this stuff about the mexican drug war. yes, our guns are going down there and we should stop the guns. we should not be manufacturing the way we are. that is about the only thing made in america still are . the number one thing may be that these are a bunch of stupid young kids remember when issue was to legalize marijuana. it is now legal in california and new jersey. you can now get in 1 ounce a month if you have cancer or aids. the drugs are not all horrible. most of the horrible drugs are manufactured by are pharmaceutical companies and people abuse them.

guest: the drug issue is very complicated. it is supply and demand for it is one that neither the europeans or the americans or latin americans have been able to come to grips with are the drugs are having a big effect in latin america. this was not true 20 years ago. we will not resolve this overnight. we need to focus on the issue now that the mexican society is bleeding very badly. united states needs to be concerned about that. secretary of state clinton said this last year. host: a dealer is asking if cuba got an earthquake like haiti, would we be there to rebuild a communist regime? guest: that is an issue of helping out a country that has terrible problems and we certainly should from a humanitarian point of view. it should be a multilateral so

that the united states cannot be blatant. med. host: the venezuelan president has ordered a popular television station off the air. rctv would not televise hugo chavez' speech. there's an editorial piece that says revolution in rowing. -- in her (what is your assessment of venezuela and its government? guest: president java's is an unpredictable and wallets of individual in latin american politics. when he is on medication, he is not in bad shape. when he is not on his medication, he makes statements. he does not like most of the other presidents and latin america.

the ball of our revolution -- what he has done successfully is to almost destroyed venezuelan democracy, the free press, and a market economy. the interesting question is how much longer he will be tolerated. host: -- the 80 situation only deepens the whole of hugo chavez bread but -- the haiti situation only deepens the whole hugo chavez hole. the united states is an empire and an evil force in the region, according to them. guest: president chavez has problems with other governments.

4lñhis army is not prepared to fight a war. he has been active in attempting to undermine u.s. interests throughout the region. he has not been successful there either. there are three or four governments that work with president chavez persia. you have a leader like you get a job as -- like hugo chavez who do not know how to govern host: what about lifting thei embargo to venezuela? guest: we would have to be very careful to provide support for the caribbean islands that take the torch and that once went to cuba from the united states. we need to have a plan in place to get economic support for those island countries. the transition in cuba which i

hope would be democratic should not fall into the hands of either the very left or very rights in cuba. the organization of american states needs to be involved. host: what about other political parties in cuba that might fill the void? guest: there's a very active human rights movement in cuba. they have suffered abuse and while there are no parties, there are civilian groups that would step forward, intellectuals, not on like hungary and the 1950's. -- in the 1950's. host: the town of sugar growth in virginia is next. caller: i'm calling about the drug war.

from what i understand, the united states is using about 80% of the drug enforcement agency's funding every year and putting it toward marijuana control. given that about 20% of everybody in prison is there because of a non-violent drug offense, do you think that the failure of the drug war is a direct result of these practices? guest: i did not know that 80% of our money was going to fight marijuana. if that is true, that is the wrong policy. that is complicated for any policy maker. it means we need a discussion of our present policy. host: 4 lauderdale is next on

our democrat line. callerhost: turn down your telen or radio and we will get to you next% antonio, good morning on our republican line. caller: i think both parties have done a terrible job in the last few years. i do not understand why they will not touch the immigration policy. bebel -- they will main post offices but they will not touch immigration. it is an ongoing problem that is getting worse. we have eight now and they want to bring those people here yet we are doing without jobs now. -- we have haiti now and they want to bring those people here yet we are doing without jobs. yet we are doing without jobs. this is terrible for

it is not cleaned up yet. the other countries have to stop depending on us to be billed for them and help themselves. i saw in haiti beautiful fruits and vegetables being sold on the streets. they have a beautiful countryside. nobody was wanting to get out there. i do not understand the policy. guest: we have made many mistakes over the decades. the united states is not very good at ruling young -- smaller countries. we tried to rule haiti for a while. it did not work out well. haiti has been without leadership for a long time. the tragedy of this earthquake,

the president has probably been the most competent president in haiti in 50 years. the national development program and then the earthquake hit. yes to begin all over again. given that that initiative was beginning to look positive for the first time in many decades, i think the u.s. and latin american community should support the president in getting back on course. host: what other latin american country has a strong presence in the haiti relief efforts? guest: i think brazil is probably the most important. 17 of them died in the earthquake. they have any strong commitment to this multilateral action and made it -- and they have been very well received. the asians love brazilian soccer. the brazilian soldiers -- the haitians love brazilian soccer. host: you have written

extensively on brazil and had articles about how reform has powered the brazilian rise. how have things changed in brazil and what has been the role of government reform? guest: these are two successive governments of two different political parties in brazil. they want to maintain very low inflation. they have begun to reduce poverty for the first time in history with a family support program which is very impressive. it goes directly to the families, not the politicians. they have begun to diversify their exports which creates jobs increased money which goes back to the brazilian people host: they are getting the olympics and a couple of years. guest: they are getting the games in 2012 and 2016.

injustice is a problem but poverty is going down and people are moving into the middle class in brazil for the first time. host: they have also formed an alliance with russia, india, and china, the so-called bric countries. guest: goldman sachs began to look around the world and see you the new drivers of the economy would be in 30 years and taken up with the idea that brazil, india, russia would be the most important players in a world economy in 200030 or so. that is proving to be true. brazil and it to the crisis lasted came out first. india and china are growing. these are very dynamic economies with tremendous resources. they are now becoming a potential replacement for much of the employees the u.s. and europe has had for a number of decades. host: what is the population of

brazil? guest: about 190 million people. host: our next caller, go ahead. lake city, fla., on the independent line. caller: i want to know the opinion of the administration's position on honduras. guest: i think the united states has had a somewhat confused position. the white house and the capital had difficulties because of congressional approval problems, the white house did not have an assistant secretary for latin america until late november, well after the crisis began. second, the hon door and issue became very deeply involved in local and regional level american politics. venezuela, brazil, they really need to sort that out now that

we have a new government in honduras. the new president has held out an effort to make peace with the opposition. i am hoping within the structure of the organization of american states, the united states will cooperate to look forward and not look backward to a bad part of our history last year. host: when does the president elect to take office? guest: in a few weeks. host: there is a critical article on the u.s. and their treatment of honduras. guest: the u.s. probably moved too quickly when the president was overthrown.

the former president was going along the chavista route. the united states is very important military and security interests in honduras. the pentagon was interested to make sure that united states maintained as strong an open legs as we could with the honduran military. these are always very tough calls for a president or secretary of state. after the initial bumbling, we have probably done as well as we could under the circumstances. host: who is the strongest ally in south america to the united states? guest: probably cause to recover. it is a middle-class country and americans go there for tourism. -- cost of rica. caller: is there a disconnected

latin america between the economic stability and the political stability of the countries in south america? it seems there is a disconnected. these countries have not been very politically stable but their economies are able to be supported and grow. you mentioned the bilateral relations is a better way to go for policy in latin america. what other countries other than brazil could we adopt that? guest: there are a number of countries we work very closely with. chile just had a presidential election and that was a major shift from the coalition of socialists to an independent on the democratic right. we will be able to work well with the president. there is a new president in

uruguay. he is a pragmatic president. we work closely with the president of columbia and the government in peru. and burt brazil -- and brazil is one of our major allies. those countries that are economically stable, in particular chile, colombia, peru, we can work with them very well. there's probably no problem because economic stability has provided strong support of open democratic societies. countries like venezuela and ecuador have tremendous political problems and will always have them ver. host: arlington, va., on a republican line. caller: it is interesting because we are talking about the governmental systems of latin america. maybe we should be talking

about their economic situation. most of them are socialists. brazil is a socialist country. zelaya tried to change the constitution in order to extend his reign and the military stepped in and ousted him. there is a cause and affect their parenere. \ hugo chavez in venezuela is a wacky gag paruy. the russians were playing word games with these guys and offering to build nuclear power plants for them. in exchange for natural gas. i think there is a threat there with russia and iran and with venezuela. .

i think the united states has

done that well of the last two administrations. host: the next call is from maryland. caller: good morning. in 1991, -- host: next call from maryland. caller: in 1991, [unintelligible] guest: i do not think anyone has a pick -- accused the president of being in najaf president. he has restored stability to columbia. the is one of the closest allies in the region of the united states. he is a natural fit -- admirable figure who i hope will not run for a third term and step down as the constitution says he should do.

host: has this arisen -- because a rise of drugs in mexico? guest: yes, it is kind of like a bubble. you push down in one place and it pops up somewhere else. aunt unfortunately, people want drugs. if they cannot get it through columbia, they will get -- to colombia, they will get it through some worlds. host

host: what is going on in argentina? guest: nothing ever goes well in argentina, unfortunately. it is a very rich country that has been very badly governed for many decades. and you have a very populist president, a woman who succeeded her husband as president. the two of them a sort of run argentine as though it were their form or their ranch. nothing is very clear in terms of policy. the central bank has been basically emasculated. the president of the bank is a very fine painter, but he's had no independence since she has come into power. people are beginning to blame the central bank, which is not true, for the mistakes of their administration. what we need in latin america are strong central banks, like chile and brazil. in the banks that understand how

to keep the inflation low and the money situation bonds and that is not happening in argentina. host: north carolina, go ahead. caller: i think this has been caller: i think this has been very unfair if anyone tried to come here, they are going to get sent to guantanamo bay. if you look at the same policy when the cubans were leaving, we got them off of book and brought them over here. one of the only elected presidents that haiti ever had -- bill clinton said he had to go when george bush got in there. our policy around the world is to put people in power that benefits us. this is what the american people

were looking for when we voted obama in, to change this policy in get out of this weight of thinking. guest: the issue of haiti is. to be a long, drawn-out debate in washington. -- is going to be a long, drawn- out debate in washington. we need to think about long- term, bipartisan support of reconstruction of haiti. the u.s. should play an important role but not be the lead. we have a large haitian-american population. they will be very concerned as to what the but house decides to do over the next few months. host: is there a general perception as to what the leaders of latin america and the people think about obama. guest: the united states is not

as popular as the president is . the united states is not as popular as the president is in some countries. but i think we are holding our own in the region. i think the president's should try to find time to the region. it would be a very exciting visit. in brazil, oden cried, chile, colombia -- are quituruguay, ch, colombia, it would be a very good visit. host: washington, go ahead. caller: are you aware of the president's -- the brazilian president's speech in copenhagen where he said, the problem is the white people in the world. the second question is there is

a country -- a company in brazil that is an offshore drilling company that in june, the obama administration gave a $15 billion loan to and i think is quite ironic that in february, george soros bought majority shares in that company. effectively, this administration has paid back george soros for getting elected with taxpayer funds. guest: i do not know anything about the second issue, but i can comment on the first. the brazilian president is a colorful, charismatic leader. then he has been for some to, to a half years. very annoyed that they have had to do things that the united states and europe-not have to do. and he has -- have not had to do. and he has been very open about saying that they have not had to

do things that they've had to do in developing countries. host: salt lake city, democratic cruller. caller: we have -- and democratic collar. host: we have more natural gas than any of the country. wyoming has a huge amount. we have not even put pipelines for the natural gas here in utah. canada, and i believe muskeo has a huge amount of natural gas -- and i believe mexico has a huge amount of natural gas without going into the ocean. why is this all focused on venezuela? guest: very interesting question and i agree with you entirely. we should be looking at a comprehensive hemispheric energy policy that would reduce our

reliance on venezuela tow -- totally and completely. that would include canada and i did not know there was damaged natural gas in the far west, but burn them in. -- bring them in. our big partner should be brazil. brazil has made major oil and gas discoveries over the last two years. it will be coming on line in the next three to five years. that should be the core of our hemisphere to energy policy. host: a headline reads, u.s. faces resistance to his line am. what is china's presence. guest: the chinese are very sophisticated.

they understand they cannot do with the russians or the iranians appear to be -- or what the man is relenza appear to be doing. tourism has grown in china. the chinese market is very important in terms of exports. once again, you mentioned earlier that brazil and china are part of this brick concept. that will be part of brazilian diplomacy as we move forward. host: tampa, fla., gerry on our independent line. are you for caller: lee with the collegeville -- caller: are you familiar with the college of america's? the intention was to destabilize lot america. that goes back a while -- latin america. that goes back a while. guest: as far as i know, there are no current plans to destabilize latin america.

the effort over the last 25 years has been to work with stable, predictable economic- democratic governments and to deal with the issues at hand over trade and investment. host: in bolivia and with morales, was the shape of the country? >guest: the imf has just about with a very favorable view of president carlos' leadership -- president moralises is doing in that country. it is an interesting case with how the leader can turn around the economy and begin to deal with the issues he needs to address. host: debbie in albuquerque. caller: listening to you and i'm

quite amused with your take on history because a lot of people in america do not know the history of what on in central america and south america. i noticed you did not seem to mention anything about chile except they are doing so great. we talk about 9/11 here, but there was a 9/11 in chile in an 1970's, which we did. we basically destroyed the country. we try to come across in the world with this altar was to get to that we're going to help everybody, but we do not -- this altruistic attitude that we're going to help everybody. but we do not. we do not like to talk about the mistakes that we have done, only the good things. but we almost destroyed chile and millions of people were killed under conditions at -- under pinochet.

he was in charge for 20 years. he got in in 73 and got out of 93. guest: my math is quite good. yours is wrong. the united states was helping the transition to democracy in chile in the 1980's. yes, we work involved in a coup in 1973, which is regrettable. >> in about an hour, president

obama, as economic plans to help the middle class. then international aid for haiti. in general jones will speak on afghanistan and pakistan. we have a several live events to talk about tomorrow morning. the senate, and security in governmental affairs committee will have a hearing on flight 253. and live coverage of representative hoyer at the national press club. and then at 11:00 a.m. eastern,

the 2010 budget and economic outlook. >> a former adviser to margaret thatcher and a british historian will be on our three our conversation live from london with your phone calls on sunday, february 7 at noon eastern book tv' "in depth " on cspan 2. >> the u.s. debt reduction task force met. this is for 50 minutes.

>> welcome. we were founded on the idea that people with different views and strong allegiance to different parties could still come together and tried to design solutions to address the nation's big challenges. we are not a think tank in the traditional sense. we said the things for a purpose. when we comeñi together, people understand they will spend as much time at the kidding for any shared a solution as they would spend constructing it. it is fair to say that the product we are launching todayw3 will test the proposition of bringing people together. it will test our ability to advocate it.

you are aware of bipartisanship which is not rich and shared in congress these days. we recognize the up here -- uphill battle. there are a number of attributes of the bipartisan efforts. ñrwhen it comes to challenging problems with their guidance, we are focused on energy and climate change. we have projects of national security in homeland security. there was a significant effort that focused on health care. over the last few years we have lunch that organizational leadership matters a great deal. we have been fortunate to have senator mitchell, we are

fortunate for this congressmen who recently joined our organization to help us get the balance we were looking for. we cannot ask for better leadership on this project than these people seated to my right. i want to recognize our project director. he has significant experience with the administration and on the hill. the only unfortunate thing about this is that some senators were unable to be with us today. sheila is going to say a few remarks on their behalf. she was chief of staff to senator dole for a number of years. she is a policy adviser and is on the faculty of harvard university. most important, she is on the board of a bipartisan organization and will

participate on this project. thanks for being with us. >> thank you very much. on behalf of the board of directors and the senators, the founding fathers of the organization, i welcome you to the launch of our task force. the with the course of my career, i have had the great privilege of working on federal budget issues with some members. and with senator pete. a variety of issues that we have struggled with year after year, but we know the work of this task force is in great hands. i recall when i worked with dole that at one point, there was a great effort to begin to address this issue that resulted in pete wilson being rolled onto

the senate floor in a gurney. it was a long evening. the result was not what we would hope it would be. it was trying to get these problems under control. i believe that both of these men -- that in fact, it is something we can do. we can deal with the deficit. it will not be easy. we all know this. it will require some very difficult decisions. we have seen pieces of that in the debate over health-care and how people look of the elements of federal spending. tough decisions have to be made. they must be made soon to put our house in order. the task force that we are

launching today will do just that. it is made up of many stakeholders, not just one group. and reckitt -- it represents a big businesses and small businesses. their goal is to give as a step to reducing the nation's deficit and debt in a reasonable time frame. such a plan can only be effective if it includes lawmakers that are responsible along with citizens. it'll be an important part of this process. now let me tell you about a

wonderful person that i have been able to work with. that is senator tom daschle. >> thank you for those very important remarks. like you, i only wish that the senators dole and bakker's could be here. i have enjoyed my second operation. they have been terrific partners. i am delighted to join them in welcoming you all here this morning. it has been my good fortune to work with them in several capacities and as a colleague.

one of the most respected fiscal -- experts in the senate while he was there, i cannot think of a challenge more important to adjust. if we continue on the present path most of the important programs for education, health care, pensions, infrastructure, and other basic social need will be pushed aside including enormous interest payments on the public debt. we cannot leave this to our children and grandchildren. there is broad and deep bipartisan support. we cannot allow the federal debt to spend all this money on defense and social programs. if that is where we are headed with our fundamental change in

the balance of revenue and spending, a bipartisan approach is really the only one. it was under president clinton that the administration worked tirelessly with other republicans to produce the last balanced budgets in our nation's history. we have to restore that kind of bipartisanship today. we have all seen the frustrations as we have been an able to achieve fiscal balance. now we are beyond the level of frustration. we are at a level of fear. we have to begin to think about downgrading america's debt. in the event of a default, then we know we can not hesitate. we need to act now. that is why we had established a task force representing almost every element of our society. there are no two people more

ready and capable to lead this task force and our leaders here this morning. it has been an honor to work with them in the past. i am thrilled to work with them now again in the future. day, the chief for his leadership and i invite him to the volume for his remarks. [applause] i think alice wants to introduce some of the members of the task force. would you like to do that? >> we are very proud of the task force members. not all of them could be here ñitodayí]ì(lc@&c+ we are pleased that many of them could. it is my pleasure to introduce in alphabetical order the

executive. the executive director of the concord coalition. jim blanchard the former ambassador in governor of the state of michigan and member of the house of representatives. sheila, you have already met. carlos gutierrez who as a former ñisecretary of commerce and befe thatçó ceo of the kellogg compa. now he is at the university of miami institute for cuban

studies. in other person i cannot think of budgets without thinking about him. he is vice president for public policy at cigna. he workedxd for several years. and the next is the president and ceo of the american council of life insurers and former governor of the state of oklahoma. another person i have known for a long time who is the senior vp and director of research for economic developments has been at the office of management's and was the former chief

economist for the budget committee. my friend and colleague anthony williams and who led to this city to a balanced budget. he is now the executive director at the corporate board and director of state municipal practices at one location. çó>> thanks. ñiherexd i am. it is good to be with you all. i feel great today. i think i feel better as governor thançó perhaps brett favre feels.

i have not made any major mistakes or had people threaten me. he has had all of those things happened to him since last night. we are probably in the worst cpieconomic future that we have ever had. that is not just a child thought, that is for real. ñito borrow a phrase from will watchers, the economics of america is in a deep hole. will watches said what you do when you find yourself in a deep hole? stop digging. it is not so easy to stop digging. we have to find ways with this task force over the next year, bipartisan working together to find a way to present them to the congress and the american people a budget.

it will encompass many years. it will provide us with a way out of this enormous unsustainable death -- debt. some want to start with one of the graphs we have here. i would make this part of our everyday life. i would put it on our forehead. let me show you this one. it is held by the public. it is not as individuals but countries, institutions that bought debt of the net the state or own it devastates dollars or the equivalent. if you think back a few years,

the tsunami. we heard it coming. we heard that a gigantic wave. look at the wave. it does not matter who is no. you use. the matter what you try to do to avoid it, it is here. we are already approaching 50% of our gdp, the equivalency of that in debt. it becomes unsustainable. most people do not think you can survive 100% over a period of time.

we had a great big debt. that is this similar, because that that was owned by s. -- that is this simildissimilare that debt was owned by us. we have to stop. something has to move in the other direction. there have been some things that we will tell the public here today and our task force members that we do not believe we can get started with ever and putting their hands onxd the tae and saying we understand this and we have to do something

about it. we have to say everything is on the table. this is where you joined a group of people said you cannot do it. if you cannot do it, get off. we want people who are saying, we can do it. that is why we ask you to do it. she knows more about it than most of us. as serious as a citizen group can be, that is how serious we are. we are going to take this on and do something about it. we understand that the united states of america could in the, if we do not abandon this line, we did in the the second great world power without doing anything. it would just happen.

for those of you that like to think of america in terms of great naval power where we can move ourselves where we have to go -- we are all committed to the proposition. america will not be a power in the growth of this kind of debt continues. we have to tell you that we think we are different than any other book -- group, not better than but different from. we have to come up with an actual plan not suggestion -- he may do this one or do that one. we are going to put it together a budget. it will take many years to get implemented. it may take 15 years for the whole effect.

what we recommend will yield a bipartisan budget that will remove this economic debt from a round of the neck. i know that some people think we have to be more specific about what all of this means. we take this job because we faced this debt crisis, and it is more than we can realistically sustained. we think we should do something about it. çówith the deficit at 10% of gd, and unemployment at 10%, the government taking on trillions of dollars, we are risking our economic security. there is no doubt about it. now we go one step forward.

.

>> this graph shows the best interest payments go abroad. here is 2000. we are already at 35% foreign. of that, the biggest holder of our debt now happens to be china. they are buying our debt which keeps some kind of equilibrium, but my friends, we are not angry at anybody. we just think we have to do something about the country like china up owning that much of our debt. we have to do it by way of our own policy. we do not have to go calling names. we have to change our policy over time where that is no longer the case. those of us who are working together here have passed real people -- have asked real people who have a stake in this country or they have a stake vicariously through their children and grandchildren, okthey have a ste

in an american future and a stake in the american dream. and i have a stake in the american dream. i can remember of father who came from italy and never went to school in america and he had a dream. and he had a wonderfully successful wholesale -- wholesale grocery business. he did what he had to do. he hired an italianate secretary. she was bilingual. he could not write so we had a secretary that could do it. there was a grand opportunity for him to get ahead. there was money at the bank. all of these things are in jeopardy today. because the united states of america, through its leaders, has made a mistake, a big mistake. we have decided to give our people more than we can afford

to pay for. i regret telling you that is another way of telling you are problem became reality. we have come to the conclusion that we cannot pay for this debt through growth alone. and we will dispose of that rather early in our deliberations, because the numbers do not add up. you cannot go through this and say we're going to change taxes. it will not work. my last observation for you is to say everything is on the table. if you are not yet a member and we are looking for two vacancies we are looking to fill -- obviously, we want every member to come to the first meeting and say collectively everything is on the table. i am a republican and i say everything and i mean everything. that means taxes are on the table, along with all programs in the government.

and if you do not wantw3 that, u better let us substitute for you. i think by the time you go through one meeting and see what a great nation could do to itself, if we do not solve this problem, i think he will want to be on. ifok you are to american -- i wt to be on this as an american citizen. i hope you think that we can solve that. and we are willing to answer questions after my good friend dr. alice speaks. and i want to say to the board in past board members we casually invited you today and it is wonderful that you have come. we will have another meeting shortly. it is my privilege to introduce my partner in this venture. doctor? >> i share the senator's fervor

that we are engaged in important enterprise. i think the biggest threat to the united states economy as we look ahead is this trajectory that we are are, this unsustainable trajectory of rising debt. i also think the greatest threat to our political system is the strident partisanship which has developed in the last few years, both parties thinking they have the only answer and less and less communication between them. so, we are here to try to do our bit to bring people from both sides of the spectrum together to face this issue. we do not have illusions that it is easy. it would have been done all long time ago. the problems to be solved are very difficult and will cause real pain.

raising taxes causes will pay. cutting spending, especially entitlement benefits that people had counted on, will cause real pain. but it is a nothing to what would happen if we pretend that we can go on this trajectory. we've actually cannot. the top end of that line is just silly. we could not borrow that much money. no one would lend it to us. the interest rates we would have to pay would sink our economy and mean that we were putting most of our tax dollars into debt service. why am i confident that we might succeed in this endeavor tax is partly because, actually, if you look at what needs to be changed, rather small changes in the un member of things -- in a

number of things, spending and tax programs, phased in over time can solve this problem. we are a productive, growing economy. this is not a problem that is unique to us. it is largely caused by the fact that we have an aging population and of rising cost of medical care so that our medical commitments and our pension commitments will grow faster than the economy and faster than taxes at any feasible rate of taxation. so we have to do something about this. but, the japanese have the worst problem. they are aging faster than we are. the europeans are aging faster than we are. many of them have taken drastic steps. we have not had to face this problem because we were lucky. we could borrow in the world currency. we have such a strong economy

that people were willing to lend it to us, seemingly without limit. but we have reached the limit and we have to face this problem. so i am hopeful that the deliberations that this group will engage in over the next few months will -- while not easy, will lead us to a package of changes in policy that will not be perfect. not everybody will agree. but will actually illustrate that the problem can be solved. and that i think is the main hope for this group. there have been other groups, which we will build -- the national academies put out a report recently that shows alternative paths to a sustainable budget. i was a member of by another

group sponsored by the pew foundation that advocated stabilizing the debt at 60% of gdp. we did not say how to do it, though. this group is going to say, is here is an illustration that it can be done. and i think that is our main function. if we can illustrate this problem is not insoluble, real changes that will not sink anybody can be put together and we can come out the other side with a much stronger economy. now we are going to take questions. and would you please identify yourself? >> i am andy sullivan with reuters news. a similar proposal is being

kicked around on the hill and the white house is looking into putting together a task force. both of those efforts plan to put out a report by the end of the year. you have a time frame? is there any guarantee that these recommendations which come up with which would be our pleasance, that they would be acted upon by your former colleagues in the senate? >> yes, we have a time frame. we want to report by the end of this year but after the election. sometime in that window. it is not clear what will happen to these various commissions that are being discussed. if an official commission moves ahead, we will be very happy to be this stalking horse and one group that illustrates that it can be done. if it does not happen, then we

will do it anyway. so that is where we are. >> i would like to say one other thing. i believe we are quite to ask the american people to sacrifice. we do not ask them that very often, and we are. ask our leaders to ask americans to sacrifice. that is because if we do not, we will lose that which we love dearly. we will lose the strength of america, the future of america. so sacrifice will be built into this. it will not be easy. we intend to offer our budget to leaders who are of like mind at like purpose. if they are moving ahead, we want to show them what our people think as we went through it. >> yes? >> i am with eir.

i wanted to ask you about the approach of the organizer of your project, peter peterson. since he was part of the team under nick said that broke -- under nixon that broke off the woods system and he got a speculators fortune. >> peter peterson is not part of this project. >> i know. he has advocated the accelerated debt of the elderly as a way to prop up speculation. how does he fit into your organization? both of you are part of the peterson -- >> to my knowledge, i am not part of it. but that does not make any difference. some people were with him, the

goat and left the organization as experts and hired by hours -- as experts and left the organization and hired by our s. mr. peterson is not part of our plans for the future, but we think he is a good citizen. we do not know what specific things he is for or against. it seems like some of the things you know you could share them with our group as we meet. next question? right behind you. >> i am wondering what you think about the health care bill, the senate health care bill and whether it should be passed as a way to help resolve or less of the deficit or whether it is counterproductive in your view. >> i will go first.

we have different views on this. [laughter] from my standpoint, i thought the bill that was contemplated by the house and senate, both of them but failed -- them failed to restrain growth in government and, therefore, i think that should have been set aside until we have had a budget put together. that is how i feel. but we are quite to have to look at health care in our budget to see how we can attempt to recommend saving money, because that is the issue. we are sorry to try to use it right and then to the curve. i do not think the bills did that. >> we do differ on that. and i had hoped and maybe still hope that the house and senate

will come together or run the health care bill. the bill's being contemplated would not add to the deficit. the wood slightly ameliorate it. -- they would ameliorated. is not an important part of the long run future problem. >> yes? >> thank you. wtop, dave mcconnell. ha what is the enforcement? what makes this thing that you are doing? is it going to be moral suasion, persuading people? to you favor one of the propositions before congress whether there would be an upper down vote by congress? what makes this thing work? >> first of all, i think we have about as powerful a commission

as you could put to take on this issue. so i think just getting it done is an accomplished and worthwhile. it will then be pushed in the groups, and the legislative groups that are doing anything like this and we will push our approach augmented -- apporach oroach on them. we are reminded of 9/11. the 9/11 commission had no authority but it was great ideas. and congress adopted them. we will put hours before them. if they do not have one, then we will build hours with them. -- meld ours with them. >> "usa today."

many of us here remember the deficit reductions of 1993 and 1997 when congress did this. what is different today that you cannot count on congress and the white house to do it themselves and, therefore, you have to assemble former members and staffers to do it for them? >> i think what is different is that we have lost the bipartisan consensus that it must be done and that it can be done. we had that at the end of the 1980's. people were worried about deficits. now, -- there was a bipartisan consensus reflected in the budget and five -- enforcement act of 1990. it was worked out by the president and congress of opposite parties. it was put in place, the budget tools, pay-go and the other

rules -- caps on discretionary spending that carried us through to balance budgets worked out by the clintons administration and by republican congress. -- and carried us through to a substantial surpluses. we have lost that consensus that it can be done and must be done and we are trying to rekindle that. >> i think it is obvious that debt is bad enough it ought to be addressed by congress by now. it should not be on the back burner. it should be addressed now. it is not. i am not there, so i do not know why. but i do believe we have to start as a citizen group. and we have to put it together and say it can be done and do it in a bipartisan manner. i think we will rekindle

something among the leaders that they have to get on with this. frankly, i do not think you could go through another full legislative session without doing something some of the kid about the deficit. that does not mean we will go down -- we have got to have some indication to the world that we are doing something about this. -- for interest rates not to go to the sky. this show and right here. -- this gentleman. >> dating back to the reagan years and before, the congressional budget office had put out potential budget cuts, tax increases, long lists. is it your realistic goal to somehow come up with a combination of ingredients that will be politically palatable,

and then what happens if the political calculus changes in november? also, are you willing -- the government cannot take its hands off my medicare? >> we may get at some point of crisis in which we cannot any longer avoid facing this issue. t(we are hoping to point out tht that crisis is sufficiently imminent said that we have to move ahead. we think that is likely to be persuasive. it is not that the leadership of the congress and the administration did not know about this problem. it is not that they do not know what some of the options are. but so far, partisanship has prevailed and we hope we can turn that around. >> i think it is obvious to the

leadership in both houses know the problem is a big one. they know it is a bad one. if we can just add to the trepidation, to the fear that this is something really big and that we'd better think big and at bigç -- and act big, so politically we are doing something we would not otherwise do. if we cannot do that, we are not addressing the problem. one more. >> "the new york times". i want to know, especially from the senator, one of the biggest things is problems facing the congressional white house efforts to put a commission together is coming to the table. the republican leaders have said they will not come to negotiations. could you try to explain why you think caps have to be on the

table? senator mitch mcconnell said he would come to is spending commission but not one that has taxes on the table. >> what kind? >> spending. >> well, iç have told you and a lengthy conference which i appreciate an early story in which you wrote a talked-about. thank you. it is clear to this senator that the problem is so big they can measure the amount of deficit reduction you are going to have to get. and if you want to be bipartisan, since it is an american debt -- but does not belong to republicans or democrats, it was incurred by americans. if you want that, you have to put entitlements on the table.

and if you do, you have to put taxes on the table. i am sorry that some republicans think otherwise, but i do not believe -- i was there a long time -- i do not believe in due spending alone and later come back and fill in what he did not do. it has got to be a package. and it has got to have taxes on the table so we can look at it and see how it fits. >> i think that is the answer. and this is spending commission, if it existed, would not have democratic support. if you walk all parties there, you have to have both pieces. >> thank you. one more. >> i served on the budget committee. >> i remember purredr. >> [unintelligible]

i was head of the task force on the 1993 clinton tax breaks, which i think had a lot to do with the prosperity that we enjoyed for the next few years. this business about non partisanship, we did not get one republican vote on that. and a large part of the democrats -- in 1994. how're you going to deal with that? i will tell you, when you start talking about this nonpartisanship, i have not seen any indication to me that it is going to work. >> well, i have not seen anything that tells me we can fix this budget -- fix this problem right here. i have not seen anything that says we can fix this and the taxes off the table. i have not found that there is

enough growth possible. we can grow and we should grow and we pray to god we will get back on the growth side, but you cannot get enough growth to take care of this problem. we'll leave it has solved? because you did have solutions? -- half-solutions? when we come down to it, we are. as a, where is the rest of it? -- going to say, where is the rest of it? >> the american people have not been inconvenience over the years. if you can inconvenience them enough, then their elected representatives will do something about it. as long as they are not inconvenience, we will not get anything done. >> the danger, butler, is that if this goes on the way that it is projected to go, we may not just have inconvenience, we may

have disaster. it would be good if the american people showed that they were sufficiently awareç of this impending disaster that they could takeç steps before it happened. >> thank you. v:[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] t(>> while thisç private groups announcing plans to work at the federal debt, the senate is planning to vote tomorrow /"gúy÷d"ovcç[ú÷yu>m'÷u-edd¢q tt require congress to create a commission to deal with debt. we talked with a capitol hill reporter about that and the underlying bill to end -- -- to increase the debt limit. >> it would create to law, the

commission or task force whose job it would be to create proposals for reining in long- term growth in debt. it would haveç the authority to do that by looking at the tax code and the savings -- all of this savings -- spending programs in that budget. it is being considered as part of legislation that raised the debt limit, ceiling on the amount of money the government can borrow. a group of more than a dozen senate democrats said that they do not want to voteç for it limit without giddy a creation of some sort of commission or special process dedicated towards controlling the growth in debt. as part of the agreement, the conrad-gregg amendment is being offered. >> how important are those

moderates in getting the votes? >> the threshold for increasing the debt limit is 60. çany republicans to vote, so ty will need every one of the democratic side. >> what is happening behind the scenes? >> right now is not clear that there is the support to pass the amendment. it likely does not have the 60 votes it will meet. t(okso the administration has bn negotiating with sarah, -- senator conrad and his allies to find a compromise. the one they floated is that the president would created that commission by executive order and that commission wouldw3 rept byda et of the year on its proposals. but the moderate senators are skeptical of that plan because it would not have the force of law and would not be enforced in congress to vote on the proposals. and what the administration to get behind the comrade-greg

w3amendment and move onw3ç from there. ç>> of the largerç legislatio, congressional leaders looking for an$'crease in the debt limit? >> they want to increase it by $1.90 trillion, which would be enough to get into next year, meaning that congress would not have to vote to raise the debt limit again before the midterm elections. any time congress has to raise the debt limit, it is always a politicalxd vote. there is criticism of whatever party is in charge of their fiscal policy. basically, a democratic leadership wants to get this done and take it off the table >> thank you. the senate is back at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow to continue work on the live coverage is on c-span-2. and a possible vote on ben bernanke to continue to lead the federal reserve.

the house's lead and c-span. the agenda includes another bill to aid survivors of the haiti earthquake. -- the house is live on c-sapn. >> in a few moments, the president outlines new economic proposals to help the middle class. in 15 minutes, coverage of the international meeting in montreal focusing on aid for haiti. after that, more about afghanistan and pakistan from national security adviser general james jones and several g)l levin, chairman of the armed services committee. ç>> wednesday, presidentw3 obaa delivers his first state of the union address to congress, laying out his vision for the future and his plan to deal with issues like unemployment, health care and the wars in afghanistan and have dennis -- iraq and afghanistan. our coverage starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

you can listen to the president's address live on your iphone with the c-span radio app. >> president obama spoke after meeting with the middle-class task force which includes the secretaries of some federal agencies and economic advisers. this 15 minute event begins with comments by vice-president joe biden. >>a year ago when president obama established the middle class task force and asked me to chair it -- and i might add, we days, melody, when he set up this middle class task force -- because as we campaigned around the country, he made it clear that we were going to be sure that as we grew this economy, the middle class was not left behind as they had been the previous 10 to 12 years. and as we move from recession to recovery, our focus is the middle class. today, living a quality middle class life starts, as it always has, with a good-paying job. and by job, we're not talking about merely a paycheck, it's

more than a paycheck. and we're talking about dignity, we're talking about security. we're talking about knowing your pension is safe, your health insurance is reliable, your elderly parents and your children are going to beçç cad for, your neighborhood is safe, there's decent schools, and that your kids are going to be able to grow up and if they desire and you desire, be able to attend college. it's the old-fashioned notion of american dream. i mean, it sounds corny, but that's literally what it is. and the president -- and you and i -- have long believed that you can't have a strong america without a growing middle class. it's that simple. it's that basic. and right now, the middle class is nowhere near as strong asç t needs to be. so next month, the middle class task force is going to deliver its final report -- not final, its year-end report to the president. and this afternoon, we're spotlighting some of the items in that report that the

president is going to be including in the upcoming budget. and these include, first of all, an expansion of the child tax credit. since 2000, child care costs have grown significantly faster than inflation and twice as fast -- twice as fast as the median income of families with children. and that's why we're asking congress to nearly double the credit for middle class families with incomes up to $85,000 and increase the credit for nearly every family making under $115,000. secondly, the president is going to be proposing an increase in funding for child care and -- the so-called child care and development fund to serve an additional 235,000 children in america. this is going to help working parents who are struggling to lift their families into the middle class. and, thirdly, elder care. i mean, we all -- we're a generation -- the so-called baby boom generation is becoming very knowledgeable about elder care and the need to help

middle class families who are caring for aging parents and relatives.t( people like jill d me are part of what's called that "sandwich" generation. and i make a very good salary, but just going through caring for my mother the last year and a half, and before that, my father, who, thank god, lived to ripe old ages -- it was -- it's not easy. we sit there -- when my brother and sister and i -- brothers and sister and i divided up the cost of the care, we were able to do that, no complaints, not a problem. but i thought to myself, my lord, what would it be like -- a couple with two kids making $85,000 a year, even $125,000 a year? how do they do it? so today we're proposing more support for caregivers by providing counseling, training, help with transportation, and temporary respite care when they just need a break or they

have to work -- which most all of them do. w3this is going to allow nearly 200,000 people who are nowçt( care to an elderly relative to be served, and 3 million hours of respite care are going to be provided. the fourth thing is we're going to be strengthening the income- based repayment program for student loans -- fancy wayç of saying a lot of kids and families graduate with significant loan responsibility and literally -- literallyç are left with very few options. they've got to go out and get the highest-paying job they can, maybe in an area they had no intention of working in, just to pay back the loan. today the average debt of a graduating senior from college -- now, listen -- the average debt -- people of my generation -- the average debt is $23,000. that is literally $2,000 more than my first house cost. but

in any standard, it's a lot of money -- average debt. some are graduating with a great deal more debt than that. so our proposal ensures that federal student loan payments for overburdened borrowers are never more than 10 percent of their income -- a change like that makes a real difference for a kid just out of school. for someone who earns 30,000 bucks and owes $20,000 inw3 loans, this would lower his or her monthly payment from $228 a month under the standard repayment plan to $115 a month. people who have to budget every day just to get by,ç they understand that's a big difference. and finally, we want to strengthen retirement security, which we talked about with the secretary of treasury, for american workers. too many working people in this country don't have a good option to save their hard-earned money for retirement. and too many of those who do save are finding that at the

end of the day they don'txd have enough saved to afford the basic retirement they deserve. that's why we're proposing to give more workers betterçó acces to retirement plans at work, to match retirement savings for middle class americans so they can save more, and to strengthen and update the 401(k) regulations so that they can save with greater confidence. this means establishingç an automatic individual retirement account. today, 78 million americans, working americans --roughly halft( the workforce -- don't have employer-based retirement plans anymore. our proposal lays the groundwork for an employer who do not currently offer retirement plans to enroll their employees in direct deposit ira's. we found it's a simple proposition -- when you do that, people, if you're automatically enrolled, you can opt out. but they save a great deal more. and it just puts in place the requirement of the employer to

provide that access out of their paycheck to go into an ira. it's a simple proposition, but it's a big deal. expanding the saver's credit, which helped workingym families save for retirement by providing a 50 percent match on the first $1,000 of retirement savings. so if you put a thousand bucks into a retirement account, your government is going to add even more -- another $500. it's an incentive, but long term it saves the government a lot more money than the 500 hundred bucks put in if in fact we find we have a generation t$t's able to care for themselves and not have to look to the government to provide some basic needs they need. this will not only help build up a nest egg for existing savers, but it's going to encourage workers who currently have no retirement accounts to start to save. taken together, these and other middle class proposals we believe will go a long way toward easing the strain on

working families, allowing them to save more today to get further ahead tomorrow. because if we give a working man and woman in this country -- and first of all, we make sure they've got good jobs -- if wei] give them an opportunity, they're the mostwd(roductive workers in the world. we give them the tools, the flexibility, even just a chancek to succeed, we're not only going to rebuild this economy, we're going to offer millions of americans to build a future çthat they hope and still belie is available to them. çso i wanted to thank allt( you guys. you've been meeting with me on a regular basis. ñri've been a little bit of a pn in the neck. i know you have urgent, urgent, urgent things that were leftzv n our plate -- placed on our plate when we took office. and one of the things you've done -- and i thank you for itiç -- when the president sett( up this task force is you have not taken your eye off the ball, you have serious people inside each of your agencies doing nothing every day but getting up, putting both feet on the floor, and saying, what are we going to do inside my shop that's going to ease the burden

and increase the opportunity for people to get into the middle class and stay in. so, mr. president -- i think the president is here -- i'd like to invite him to come out because we owe the president a great deal for focusing this issue throughout the campaign and the first thing you did when you came to office. mr. president, it's an honorñr working with you on this. >> thank you. thank you, joe. hey, guys, everybody have a seat -- have a seat. well, i wanted to stop by to comment on all the great work that the middle class task force is doing. çand you've just seen why joe s the right person to do it. no one brings to the table the same combination of personal experience and substantive expertise. he's come a long way, and achieved incredible thingsi] alg the ride, but he's never forgotten where he came from and his roots as a working-class kid from scranton.

he's devoted his life to making the american dream a reality for everyone - because he's lived it. now, we all know what that american dream is. can make of our lives what we will. it's the idea that if you work hard and live up to your responsibilities, you can get ahead - and enjoy some of theç basic guarantees in life -- a good job that pays a good wage, health care that'll be there when you get sick, a secure retirement even if you're not rich, an education thatç will give our kids a better life than we had. 1ethey're very simple ideas. çb]t!they're the idess that are at the heart of our middleç class - the middle class that4+% made the 20th century the american century. unfortunately, the middle class has been under assault for a long time. too many americans have known their own painful recessions long before any economist declared that there was a recession. we've just come through what

was one of the most difficult decades the middle class has ever faced - a decade in which median income fell and our economy lost about as many jobs as it gained. for two years, joe and i traveled this country and we heard stories that are allok too familiar -- stories of americans barely able to stay afloat despite working harder çand harder for less, premiums that were doubling, tuition fees that were rising almost as fast, savings being used up, retirements put off, dreams put on hold. that was all before the middle class got pounded by éhdç full fury of the worst economic crisis since the great depression. their stories are why joe and i ran for this office: to reverse those trends, to fight for the middle class, to make sure working families have a voice in the white house, and to do everything within our power to make sure they don't just survive the crisis, but again they can thrive.

and when we walked through these doors last year our first and most urgent task was to rescue our economy, to give immediate relief to those who were hurt by its downturn, but also to rebuild it on a new, stronger foundation for job creation. so we helped state and local governments keep cops and firefighters and teachers on the job, helping to plug their budgets. we invested in areas with the most potential for job growth both immediate and lasting -mçç our infrastructure, in science in clean energy. and these steps have saved or created about 2 million jobs so far. but more than 7 million have been lost as a consequence of this recession - an epidemic that demands our relentless and sustained response. çnow, last month the houseç passed a new jobs bill. the senate, as we speak, is hard at work developing its own job creation package.

creating good, sustainable jobs is the single most important thing we can do to rebuild the middle class - and i won't rest until we're doing just that. but we also need to reverse the overall erosion in middle classç security so that when this economy does come back, working americans are free toç pursue their dreams again. there are a variety of immediate steps we can take to do just that - steps wewiì(lc@&+ poised to begin taking in the budget that i'll put forward next week. çjoe already spoke about somef these proposals in detail - proposals that make it a bit easier for families to get by, for students to get ahead, and for workers to retire. çto make balancing work and family more realistic, we'll make it easier to care for children and aging loved ones. to make college more affordable, we'll make it easier forç students to pay back their loans, and forgive their debt earlier if they choose a career in public service. çand to make retirementxd more

secure, we're going to make it easier to save through the workplace. joe and i are going to keepç oç fighting for what matters to middle class families -- an education that gives our kids a chance in life, new, clean energy economy that generates the good jobs of the future, meaningful financial reform that protect consumers, and healthçw3 reform that prohibite worst practices of the insurance industry and restores some stability and peace of mind for middle class families. xdnone of these steps alone will solve all the challenges facing the middle class. joe understands that. so do i. so do all my members of the cabinet and our economic team. çbut hopefully some of these steps will reestablish someq%f the security that's slippedç away in recent years. çbecause in the end, that'sç w joe and i measure progressç -- not by how the markets are doing, but by how the american people are doing. it's about whether they see some progress in their own lives. ñrso we're going to keep fightig

to rebuild our economy so that hard work is once again rewarded, wages and incomes areç once again rising, and the middle class is once again growing. and above all, we're going to keep fighting to renew the american dream and keep it alive -- not just in our time, but for all time. so, again, to our team -- and that includes, by the way, the folks over here -- thank you for the great work that you've done. i'm excited about a lot of the proposals that you've come up with. and we expect that we're going to be able to get some of these critical initiatives passedçç soon so that folks can get some help right away. thank you veryç much.t( [applause] >> i would like to get together permissiond on your schedules sometime in the next two weeks.

it is presumptuous of me to say it, but thank you for coming. the good news about this is it all starts -- [inaudible] thanks. >>i] representatives of more thn a dozen countries and the european union are meeting in montreal to coordinate aid efforts for haiti. haitian officials are expected to ask -- asked for $3 million -- $3 billion. this is courtesy of canada's cable public affairs channel. >> iç have the honor to present to you the president of canada, -- the prime minister of canada, the very honorable stephen harper. >> ladies and gentlemen, before we start, first i would like to thank each and every one of you for taking the time, despite

your very heavy schedule to take the time to be here today. by being here today you do credit to the great nations you represent, to the great organization to represent and of course, reflects the great priority that all citizens of the world plays on the challenge before us. [speaking french] i would alsoqwl like to welcomee prime minister of haiti. and so, mr. prime minister, i have to say to you once again that on behalf of the government of canada i offer my most sincere sympathy to you and everyone in haiti. you can be sure that our thoughts and our prayers, the prayers of all canadians are with our brothers and sisters in haiti. the entire world has been moved by the scenes of devastation in haiti.

the destruction wrought by the earthquake in his already fragile country is truly heart wrenching. like canada, countries throughout the hemisphere have responded swiftly and generously. thanks to a decisive international action, medical, humanitarian and search and rescue support is pouring into the country. private citizens are also intruding greatly. [speaking french] >> and canadians show compassion and generosity and are moved by the suffering of the people of haiti. a record number of people have opened up their hearts and made many generous gifts and donations in order to make their contribution to the humanitarian effort. >> to the kindness and compassion that unites humanity in the face of catastrophe. the difficulty we face, then, is

not one of concern, but rather, one of coordination. we must work to ensure that every resource committed, every relief worker, every vehicle, every dollar is used as effectively as possible. [speaking french] >> as a world leader, canada takes its role very seriously, particularly with respect to our responsibilities inq the western hemisphere. >> this special responsibility is one reason why we convened this meeting to better harmonize international efforts in haiti. çin order to do the greatest amount of good, we must work together. as we continue to focus on fast and effective humanitarian assistance, we must at the same çtime begin to look at the longer-term challenge of reconstruction. this meeting is amç crucial fit step in that direction.

the international community must be prepared for a sustained, significant effort in haiti, relying on the leadership of the government of haiti and in line with its priorities. t(çit is canada's hope that ths meeting will set the stage for a broad, international conference on reconstruction thatç will mobilize the will and resources of all of the's partners. today's conference will allow us to agree on principles that should guide our approach on haiti's reconstruction. let mei] highlight a few of thee principles. one, sustainability is key. we need to commit to haiti for the long term. [speaking french] i am not exaggerating when i say, 10 years of hard work, at least 10 years is what we will have to do in haiti.

two, we need to focus on effectiveness. the haitian people deserve it. and our own taxpayers expected. 3, we must hold ourselves and each other accountable for the commitments that we make. i would like to see emerge from this meeting the beginnings of a plan that will guide reconstruction in haiti in a way that is affected, coordinated, and strategic for the decade to come. the task which awaits us is considerable, but our determination to give hope to our haitian friends, member of the large community of nations, is even greater. more than ever, we must be united in order to help haiti. i am convinced, ladies and gentleman, that together, we will succeed in meeting the challenge. thank you.

>> thankxd you, prime minister. now i would call on the prime minister of haiti to give us his vision of the future of this country. prime minister? >> thank you, çprime minister harper. i would take the opportunity to thank you and -- >> -- thank all of those who came today to show their support for haiti. -- who came as friends to listen to what we want to do over the next few years. ladies and gentleman, i would like to pass on to you the thanks of a country that is a martyr, that is ruined but is still standing. our government has been deeply affected, but we are working with the population especially to build bridges towards a better country. on january 12, 2010, it was the

worst moment in our history. there were sacrifices made by the entire people, with the help of the international community. it was a day that will remain indelibly in the memory of the nation -- a nation that was trying to get out of misery. we must admit that archaeologists had predicted the earthquake was possible, but we had social problems, we were qfighting poverty, and we did nt have the time to take the measures to alleviate the damage of such a catastrophe. the government's -- there were buildings that were flat. some people survived miraculously. some died under a cloud of dust. shortly afterwards, we realized that we did not have any houses, no documents, no archives.

we went on foot to see if the city was in the abyss of human suffering. communications were paralyzed. we found the necessary energy to help a few people. now, that is a description of what the government experienced during that period. but i would like to point out that i would like to focus on the fact that the main hero on january 12 was the haitian people. they showed fraternity and compassion immediately as they çstarted helping those in difficulty. thousands of people started working immediately to try to get the unknown people or those they hold dear, to get them out of brick -- to bring them to the hospital. a great deal of solidarity was shown. that is thet( strength of our nation. is this resilience and this

strength, whatever the plan we agree upon, whatever the vision, that the government could propose -- is on the strength and resilience we can build the future of haiti. nonetheless, once again, on behalf of the president and the haitian population, i would like to thank all the actors who are getting involved in are still involved today. we need your help urgently. we need your of today. we needed your help yesterday. people claim that this period of emergency is over, but it is not the case. it will last for a long time. we will have to talk about reconstruction. today i received a call from the french president. and we told them that we needed 200,000 tents.

the call came from the president of haiti, but we must find urgently some tents. people are living in the streets. to talk about reconstruction means that we must have the capacity to meet the primary today they are living in the streets. the construction meanst( that we can understand the territory where we interact. many people have left the capital towards the provinces. yesterday, i visited centers here. çthere are many people -- peope of other nationalities. -- they went to the united states canada, to other countries. we must understand the territory we are referring to. many people went to the provinces. they traveled, and cursed by the government. we felt it was good to encourage

this initiative -- encouraged by the government. the population movements have changed. our needs have changed. and rebuilding port-au-prince means we have to reassess the entire country into the needs of the entire country. it also involves a job creation of the entire territory. 400,000 families are in the street. they have to the house. in centers, they need various services, health services. and quickly, they must be able to send their children back to school. and quickly, they will have to find the means to find work for them. 400,000 families for which there is no hope left today. i am coming to this conference onç behalf of the government to talk about reconstruction and i must be able to tell those families what tomorrow holds for

them. it is not yet clear for us. many, many things happened in haiti. coronation is crucial to solve the problems. record nation is crucial. but for the past three days, things are better. we are getting a. it is reaching the population. -- we are getting aid. we are starting to better identify the problems that would prevent the normalization i. here are the priorities -- more hospitals in the areas affected, we house the homeless, as i said, distributed essential products to it leased 3 million people over the next three months. -- to at least 3 million people over the next three months. repair the health centers in

operations. many hospitals have been installed, but today they are full of people who are ill. they could leave the hospital today, but they have no house. they have no housing. and they are afraid that in their house that would not get medication and care. . .

so on behalf of the haitian -- to a company is, to stabilize the emergency situation. those that are out of the emergency phase that we are in the humanitarian phase. asking of you today. reconstruction. it is clear that you cannot rebuild the houses that were destroyed in a mechanical way. we have to certify the house, we have to understand the space, we have to displace populations. this women require a lot of support -- will require a lot of support and technical assistance from our partners. that's the first thing i'm asking of you on behalf of the government, this technical assistance so once again we can have a cohesive approach and take ownership of our national space. the second thing i'm asking of you is understand with us, but i see we've already won that battle.

i heard mr. harper, the prime minister, to understand that this situation will take months and many years to get back to january of 2010, according to our first assessments, it will take four or five years to get back to a situation which was not acceptable according to all. so from the point of view of the government, we are convinced that without cynicism, there is an enormous opportunity for our partners. hundreds of thousands of haitians have died, made the sacrifice involuntarily, and the government and myself particular as prime minister, i'm trying to take into account that cooperation that's been happening for 20, 30 years. why so many effort, so much goodwill did not lead to the development of haiti. that has to be considered as well. everyone is talking about coordination.

but where is the blockage? why is there no coordination? of course we heard many n.g.o.'s and associations talk çóabout problems from the fundig organizations, but -- and i thought about this and come to three conclusions. first of all, the government structures as they are today cannot meet this emergency that exists today in haiti, so we are in the process of doing this, myself and the president and others, we're thinkingñi about structures that will better allow us to coordinate our action with the departments, and we're creating crisis committees that can better correspond to the structure that will be set up in haiti with the united nations in order for better coordination. the second conclusion we have come to is accessive centralization. in 30 seconds haiti lost about 60% of their g.d.p. because all

of our resources are concentrated in and around the national palace. we have to decentralize. it's the only way to be efficient. it's the only way to avoid the same problem in the future. and finally, human resources. i spent an evening last night with the haitian community and i told the haitians i have no alternative. we have to act immediately through the government. we've lost many, many civil servants, senior civil servants. many people are traumatized and afraid and are leaving the country. we need to organize. i have no alternative. they have to be involved in haiti. they have to be engaged. we need to have better government. we need to decentralize, compulsory decentralization and participation and engagement.

i think this will allow us to think about a reconstruction that would be much stronger, that can guarantee the private investment will start happening in haiti. haiti will not be renewed if investors have not come to haiti. they must feel that they can invest without risk. the media asked me questions. when i came to canada i flew over this boat, 6,000, 7,000 were on the beach. i was very comforted. haiti is still alive. haiti has opportunities. i know that many people felt it was unfortunate these people were on the beach. i think it's positive. those people that work are

getting a salary. we have to show that haiti is still the land of opportunity. so i thank you all. thank you for being present here today. it demonstrates the will of the international countries who come to haiti. the first earthquake happened 12 days ago and all the haitian people showed solidarity. and i wanted to address the gratitude of the president of the republic, the government, the haitian people for this generalized solidarity around the world. and i hope it will not simply be a flash in the pan. haiti needs support from the international community for some time. haiti still needs to strengthen its nation, its governmental structures, haiti still needs

its brothers and sisters abroad. please continue helping us. thank you. >> in a few moments, prime mini. and in the conservative party leader. >> of washington journal, they will take your questions about the economy. we will be live from the

washington auto show with jim campbell of general motors, and jim o'donnell from bmw. washington journal, live >> the senate homeland security committee will speak about like you're under 53. that is here on c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span-2, live coverage of house majority leader and stanley hoyer at the national press club. that is live on c-span-3 at 11:00 a.m. eastern. across the country, listen to c-span radio in washington at

90.1 f.m. and on xm satellite radio channel 132. it's also a free app for your iphone. c-span radio, covering washington like no other. >> now national security advisor james jones on afghanistan and pakistan. he spoke to the center for america's progress for 45 minutes. >> after his speech, there is a panel on afghanistan and pakistan. this entire event is one hour 40 minutes. >> good afternoon. my name is larry korb. and on behalf of our president, john podesta, and my colleagues here at the center for america progress, i'd like to welcome you to this meeting we're having on the administration

strategy in afghanistan and pakistan. this will be conducted in two parts. our keynote speaker will be general jones who is the national security advisor. he will speak, answer questions until he has to go back and take care of all the things he needs to do. and then we're going to have a panel that will be chaired by my colleague caroline wattums, that will follow up. right now i'd ask you, first of all, please turn off your cell

phones and blackberry also and all of those things, if you would. and i will introduce general jones. now, we all know general jones as has been the commandant and also the nato commander but he also has had one of the most diverse experiences of anybody to ascend to the highest positions in the military, as well as in the national security advisor. he's commanded at every level from the plat on to the division. he's held staff positions in washington with the commandant, the chief of naval operations, the secretary of defense, as well as working in congress. and he's a highly decorated combat veteran, including the silver star and the bronze star with a combat v. and getting ready, introducing him, i was doing a little research and found out that he is the fifth career military officer to serve as national security advisor. each of the other services, the air force, the army, and the navy have had one but the marines have had two. so goes to show you how influential the marines are. so general jones, we welcome you here to the center and we look forward to your comments. \[applause] >> larry, thank you very much.

ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. it's a pleasure to be here. and i look forward to talking to you about afghanistan and pakistan, but before i do that, i'd like to thank the center for american progress for the invitation. thank you, larry, for your kind introduction, but also of your own service to our government and to john podesta, i don't know if john is here today, but john obviously served as a real leader in the transition team and we managed to hijack a

number of people and good ideas from those people who now serve in the administration and the n.s.c. itself. so thank you for this great contribution to our nation. it's been a year since the president took office and as we all know, on the eve of the state of the union, none other than larry korb recently said in the years since his election the president has reversed the decline in american security in his decisions in key areas have put us on the road to recovery. i take that as -- from someone who is known as a frequent critic of our policies, and i mean that in the constructive way, in the best way. larry, thank you for that observation. we take it to heart. my own experience with the president before the election goes back to some discussions we had about the importance of restoring america's role on global security issues, how diverse those issues have become, how national security or international security is now so much more diverse than it was a few short years ago and what it encompasses, things such as

climate and energy, economic issues, the establishment of american competitiveness in the world. and of course in the traditional panoply of relations between nation states and also the family of asymmetric issues that face us all in this very, very challenging, still young 21st century. the strategy that we are implying in afghanistan and pakistan and the whole region has to be seen in the context of an overall approach to foreign policy. so with your permission, i'll take a few minutes to go over some of those aspects and some of those challenges. one of the first things we set about doing after the inauguration was to reorganize the national security council so it could deal with this -- these multiple challenges that face us. after studying the makeup of

the homeland security council and national security council, we decided to combine the two into one staff, national security staff. we've added economic -- an economic focus to our deliberations. we've added, as i said before, our focus on terrorist threats. we've added cybersecurity. we have divided -- essentially we look at the globe in regions much the same way other agencies look at it. so we're trying to have a process by which for all the major decisions the president has to take, that there is a whole government approach in the sense that we have scripted membership of who sits on the national security council.

we're able to widen or shrimp the participation depending on the issues being discussed in such a way that these issues are developed from the bottom up. they go through rigorous analysis, a lot of discussion as they work their way up to the president of the united states for his decision at full meetings of the national security council that he chairs. i think that this process not only reflects the reality of the world as we look at it and as we face it, but also it's able to accommodate the cohesion that is required on behalf of the -- within the interagency as we deal with these issues. so organizing the national security council to face the world as it is, not so much as we wish it would be, although

that's worth thinking about as well, but dealing with strategic issues of the time, teeing them up in such a way that they are handled and discussed by people who have equities so that the president can make his decision. then after the decision is made, to also participate in a process whereby we verify the implementation of those provisions is actually being carried out. so the beginning of the administration, of course, everyone knows we have faced tours, iraq and afghanistan. we knew that we need to do some work with regard to the relationships, the alliances and the partnerships that we were involved with around the world we knew nonproliferation would be a big issue and still remains a very big issue and we'll have to do a lot of work on that score.

we also knew there would be international threats such as climate and energy and have taken that aboard. we knew there were crisis at home and abroad and u.s. leadership in those areas were going to be challenged. that's still a work in progress and will continue but it's very, very much at the center of our focus. and then overall, and i think a challenge of restoring the reputation of the united states is a -- as a nation of of willing to commit to leadership, willing to commit to a new era of engagement based on

mutual interest and mutual ñirespect, which probably is the defining feature as i would state it, the defining feature of our foreign policy. and by engagement, what we're talking about here is renewing and strengthening alliances and partnerships as we've done on europe, nato and the strategic concept review ongoing and supporting european integration and the asian-pacific region where we've worked to strengthen alliances with japan, south korea, australia, thailand, the philippines, and deep in cooperation with partners such as indonesia and malaysia. and in the middle east, we affirming america's unwavering commitment to the peace process as we pursue the arab-israeli efforts to find the common ground to restart the talks and continue to work hard to convince both parties there is

a strategic interest to do so in the shortest period of time. and then the americas in our own hemisphere, especially in our partnerships with new mexico and colombia and brazil, central america. and i would suggest that our response to the horrific situation in haiti is further proof that we are indeed a partner that can be counted on and relied on in both good times and bad. and i think the response that has been garnered in support of haiti has been very effective and will only get better as time goes on. çóçorin africa, the president'sp to ghana signaled new

opportunitie and a partner for good governments and developing -- and development that improved lives. and i think africa will be a continent and is a continent already that we have to spend much more time thinking about strategically, particularlyçó as we look at the expansion of al qaeda-like networks throughout the -- at least the northern part of that continent. but the potential of it going elsewhere. engagement also means deepening cooperation with key centers of power, in russia, the so-called reset has elevated relations to the best point in years. in china, we now have a broad- based strategic and economic dialogue. in india, president obama -- which president obama calls one of the defining relationships of the 21st century. and obviously brazil, these arei new realities, new centers of power and influence that are coming on the world scene and that we will have to engage with and do so constructively and effectively. engagement also means strengthening the united

nations. we have paid our bills. we've joined the human rights council and fully embraced the millennium development goals. engagement also means supporting international and regional institutions, such as the e.e.u., oscu, o.a.s., the african union, the organization of the islamic conference. it also means presidential outreach to the world and to different publics, different audiences, always focusing on our shared interests and common aspirations, speeches, town hall meetings in strasburg and istanbul, shanghai, a new beginning with the world's muslims, beginning with the cairo speech. and yes, engagement means also being willing to conduct principle diplomacy with adversaries, always making it clear that every nation has both rights and responsibilities.

of course we're not engaging other nations for the sake of engagement. engagement is not an end in itself. it is a means to an end, to greater cooperation on challenges, greater burden sharing by all and greater security for the united states and its friends and allies. so the leadership of the united states and the president's commitment to that leadership has yielded progress. we think tangible, meaningful results across the board. the global economy, we helped pull the world back from economic catastrophe. we worked with allies and partner in the g-8 and g-20 to provide stimulus to the global economy and promote growth that's balanced and sustained and focused on avoiding another such crisis. with regard to ending the war in iraq, we are fulfilling our pledge for responsibly end this war. all u.s. combat brigades will be out of iraq by the end of august of this year and all troops -- all combat troops will be out by the end of next year. even as the u.s. remains a

long-term partner in iraq's recovery, its security and future prosperity. we note there are continuing challenges in iraq with today's sad and tragic bombing attacks in the capital, but we still believe we're on the right path and that iraq will be able to take care of itself and its security needs in the near future. we've taken the fight to al qaeda worldwide, including refocusing our efforts on afghanistan and pakistan which i'll discuss more fully in a moment. and we've strengthened the global nonproliferation regime. the president has laid out his agenda in prague, working

towards the world without nuclear weapons with russia, making progress on the follow on start agreement. mike mullen and i led a team to moscow these past two days and returned on saturday and are moving towards good results in the not too distant future. as the first u.s. president to chair a meeting of the u.n. security council, the president has won an unanimous solution on steps to stop proliferation. hosting a nuclear security summit this april in washington to rally other nations to help secure the world's nuclear materials within four years is one of our aspirational goals. we have secured new, stronger sanctions against north korea and in the context of the six- party talks we sent the ambassador to pyongyang last month for direct talks which has not happened in a long time. and to those who claim engagement on iran has not yielded dividends, we should really look at the facts. engagement -- our strategy in iran has resulted and is resulting in an unprecedented level of international consensus and unity on iran, making it

clear that tehran must meet its responsibilities or face the consequences. we've also tried to lead on energy, security, and climate change at home. the president will help create clean energy jobs. he's staked out a leadership role in climate change in pittsburgh. the g-20 agreed to phase out fossil fuel subsidies at copenhagen. for the first time all major economies accepted their responsibility to take future action. the president acknowledged this is not enough and we'll continue our efforts to provide the leadership that is required in this important and challenging area. all of this is, of course, just

the start. our challenge now is to sustain and build on the start that has been made this year. there are no shortages of challenges to test us, north korea, iran, arab-israeli peace, al qaeda and its affiliates in afghanistan and pakistan specifically, and around the world jeanly. so now let me turn very briefly to the afghan-pakistan strategy and exactly where we are today. in review of our efforts in afghanistan and pakistan this fall, the president asked some very difficult and tough questions, challenged assumptions and heard from every perspective and explored every option. most importantly, this was a

review that never lost sight of those affected most by presidential decisions, and that's the men and women who carry out their orders and the impact it would have on their families, both civilian and militarylike. in a speech at west point, the president made clear that our security is at stake in afghanistan and pakistan. this region remains the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al qaeda. this is where the 911 attacks were planned and this is where extremists were arrested recently in the u.s. have been trained. and this is where attacks are being plotted right now. with regard to the situation on the ground, al qaeda retains its safe havens on the border regions of afghanistan and pakistan. the government in afghanistan legitimately elected is still hampered by corruption, a viable drug trade and underdevelopment.

and there is insufficient security for the forces that face a growing insurgency. this is the situation as we started the review. with regard to the risks, there are risks to this strategy, the risk of scaling back our efforts, or worse, abandoning the area altogether. a region that slides backwards where al qaeda could operate again without impunity is unacceptable. the risk of instability in a nuclear armed pakistan at a time when al qaeda seeks nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction and would use them is not acceptable. ñ+wñrin short, an unacceptablek of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies is also one of the things that we put on the table as being something we had to look at. we need -- we sought clarity about our mission, and we

achieved that, starting in the spring of 2009 with the initial review, of the rydell study and we come out with a clear statement that applies today as to our mission, which is to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al qaeda and its extremist allies in afghanistan and pakistan, and to prevent their return to either country. we needed to achieve clarity with regard to our objectives and think we've done that. in afghanistan we are objective as to deny al qaeda a safe haven, to reverse the taliban's momentum and to deny it the ability to overthrow the government. and to strengthen the capacity of afghanistan security forces and government so they can take

the lead responsibility for their future and do so in the shortest amount of time possible. ñrand in pakistan, it is to support the security and prosperity that is the best anecdote for the extremism that threatens was you will, and toñr eliminate the sanctuaries that exist in that country. we've achieved clarity about our strategy to meet those objectives and it has three main components to it. a military effort that creates the conditions for security, and a transition in afghanistan. a civilian effort that promotes development and good governance, and finally, because our strategy has to succeed on both sides of the border, an effective partnership with pakistan. so let me talk briefly about each of those three. with regard to the military aspect of things and our troops in afghanistan, including the 30,000 additional troops that

will be sent there, they have the clear mission to target, train, and transfer, to targeti the insurgency and protect key afghan cities and towns, to increase the training of afghan security forces,ñi currently numbering around 200,000 afghans fighting for their country. and to bring them into the fight. and lastly, to createñi the conditions on the ground forñi e transfer of responsibility to afghan forces. our nato allies have increased their commitment in a very positive manner. this includes greatñi britain, italy, spain, romania, poland. together our allies will be contributing nearly 7,000 more troops and trainers. the sum total of those contributions will continue to grow in the next few weeks as we

get closer for the conference on january 20. this reflects our recognition security is threatened and reflects our efforts to strengthen our alliances. having served in nato, i think nato has shown much more cohesion and much more recognition that this is the strategic moment in which all nations, all contributing nations must come together to better harmonize security efforts, governance, and rule of law in afghanistan and also economic development. so as a result, we'll accelerate handing over responsibility for afghan security by july of 2011, some u.s. troops will begin to come home. this is probably the most discussed and perhaps most misunderstood part of the strategy, so i want to be clear with regard to what this means and what it doesn't mean. july 2011 is not a withdrawal

date, it is the beginning of transition to -- of responsibility to afghan authorities and forces. as the president said, and i quote, just as we've done in iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. we'll continue to advise and assist afghanistan security forces, to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul, unquote. nor does july 2011 have in any way encouraged our adversaries to buy time or wait us out. nothing in its history suggests the taliban will easily yield. as coalition forces move in, we expect the fighting to be fierce.

and if for some reason they did choose to wait us out, then while they're waiting, we'll be seizing the initiative, securing population centers, training stronger afghan forces and making it harder for the insurgency to return. with the july 2011 date does do, and this is why the president feels it's so important is this, it sends an important signal to the afghan people that we're not interested in waging an endless war or occupying their country, that we want to be their partners and not their patron and it sends a clear and urgent message to the afghan government they will have to take responsibility for their own security in the shortest delay possible. even as we pursue those who threaten us, the president has said we will support efforts by the afghan government to open the door to those taliban who abandon the violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens. secondly, on the civilian side, our strategy recognizes that security and prosperity in

afghanistan ultimately rests on good governance and investment in people. as the president said, the days of blank checks are over. from now on our assistance will support those who combat corruption and improve the lives of ordinary afghans, especially in areas such as agriculture and tapping the country's natural resources which include iron ore, marble, gemstones and the like. this is not nation building but capacity building. we're helping build the capacity of afghans to provide for their own security, their own governance, and their own prosperity. in short, their own future. it's still much too early to judge how our strategy is working. our troops have just started to arrive and won't be fully in place until this summer. but early signs are encouraging. we are encouraged by the steps president karzai has taken to approve the effectiveness and credibility of his government, and we're committed to working in partnerships to reduce corruption which along with the

insurgency is perhaps the greatest threat to afghanistan. and recent polls of public afghan opinion are also encouraging. afghans in significant numbers blame the taliban far more than coalition forces for violence that exists in the country. most afghans believe the taliban is growing weaker, and by huge margins, about 9-1, clearly prefer the afghan government that they have to any alternative the taliban might offer. but our progress on the ground and the attitudes of the afghan people show we're making progress in achieving our objectives and accomplishing our mission in afghanistan as articulated by the president. the third part of our strategy is a stronger partnership with pakistan. the people of pakistan have suffered greatly at the hands of

terrorism. pakistanis, civilians, military, police, civilians have sacrificed their lives fighting terror. and they recognize that their country and their future is also being targeted. pakistan has shown a new resolve in this fight, launching major offenses against extremist sanctuaries. in partnership, we're confronting al qaeda directly and inflicting losses on al qaeda leadership, making it clear we will tolerate no safe haven. for our part, rather than relying so heavily on a single leader, we're now investing more broadly in the pakistani people. . . . . display device settings device: nci generic encoder interface: modem (different with different computers, but you only have one to pick from,

the efforts in pakistan or directly affect the speed with which we achieve our objectives in afghanistan the military effort to deny safe havens and excel rape afghan forces, -- accelerate afghan forces, with a partnership. these are the underlying conditions that fuel extremism. in other words, we are attempting to make it clear that we will be the maintain a partnership with pakistan that

book targets extremists and addresses the underlying conditions that you'll extremism. we're attempting to make clear that we will neither maintain a permanent military force in afghanistan nor abandon the region to extremism. we're making it clear that the people in afghanistan and pakistan have a reliable long- term partner in the united states. but as the president has also made clear at west point, and i quote, "the struggle against violent extremism will extend beyond afghanistan and pakistan." after years of u.s. counterterrorism operation and in cooperation with our partners, the core of al qaeda has been seriously damaged. nevertheless, al qaeda has proven to be adapted and highly resilient. as we've seen in the recent thread on christmas day, we face a threat from al qaeda and its affiliates around the world. american and iraqi efforts have greatly succeeded in reducing the capability of al qaeda. suicide bombings have been greatly reduced, notwithstanding the violence that we saw today, but recently to look tax including in the heart of baghdad underscored the need for vigilance. on the arabian peninsula, the saudi arabian effort has found

some success. next door in yemen it was al qaeda in the arabian peninsula that was responsible for the attack over detroit. the fighting instant -- and instability make it easier for the east african network. al-shabaab is controlling more territory and launching more attacks. war lordism is attracting somalis living in the united states. another affiliate remains the most active in the region and will continue to pose a significant threat to american interests throughout the region as well as throughout the continent of europe itself. in southeast asia, close cooperation with partners in their region, especially indonesia, has resulted in the arrest and deaths of hundreds

of operatives. and what's capabilities have been badly damaged, this summer's deadly attacks and jakarta understand this -- underscore the continuing threat. this is not to mention people been radicalized right here in the united states. al qaeda has made no secret of its desire for american recruits that would defy conventional notions of a terrorist. while the threat from al qaeda extends far beyond, our mission remains the same, to dismantle and defeat al qaeda and its allies. in our war against al qaeda, we're using every tool in our disposal. we will come pick -- will keep the pressure on al qaeda and its affiliates wherever they plot and train, and we will be relentless in our efforts. we will strengthen intelligence to ensure that we have the timely and accurate intelligence that prevents terrorist attacks, and as the president directed after the christmas day incident, there

are a series of reforms that we will be putting in place to analyze the intelligence that we have in a timely fashion. we will pursue aggressive law enforcement to deter terrorist attacks at home and with our allies and partners. we will share intelligence capacities to deny al qaeda a safe havens in east africa and the saharan regions. we will dedicate ourselves to nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists. we will strengthen the global nonproliferation regime and secure the world's vulnerable nuclear materials, all within a period of four years. we will secure the homeland at every level, local, state, and federal, including aviation security. so it has been a you're a great challenges, but also your progress on many fronts. much more remains to be done. if you had asked me a year ago

how long it would -- -- how long it would take for america to regain its standing in the issue will pursue aggressive law enforcement to deter terrorist attacks at home and with our allies and partners. we will share intelligence capacities to deny al qaeda a safe haven in east africa and the saharan regions. we will dedicate ourselves to nuclear-weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists. we will strengthen the global nonproliferation regime and secure the world will marble nuclear materials, all within a period of four years. so, it has been a year of great challenges, but also a year of progress on many fronts. much more remains to be done.

if you had asked the a year ago how long it would have taken for america to regain its standing in the world, i would say seven years. and that is just what has happened in one year. we see it in public opinion polls are around the world, i see it in my own travels and meeting with counterparts around the world. united states is globally engaged once again. our country -- other countries have seen that we want to be partnered with them on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interest, and most importantly other countries want to partner with us on a range of common challenges. that serves our interests and that makes our country more secure. of course, it is just a start, and an assessment, it getting

off to a good start is not enough. the challenge now is to sustain and build on the progress we have made, and that is exactly what we intend to do it in the days, months, and years ahead. thank you very much for your time. >> general jones can take a few questions but please focus on afghanistan and pakistan. it by calling you, please identify yourself. >> "the philadelphia inquirer." george jones, you spoke of the importance of pakistan and a while back you said there were only 100 al qaeda in afghanistan. given those two facts, how is our strategy affected by the response that secretary guy -- secretary gotten pakistan when he was told that pakistan would not expand its fight against the safe havens for a minimum of six to 12 months and gave the

impression that it might be longer than that, if ever? >> it is beyond question, as i mentioned in my remarks, that the speed with which we are able to achieve our goals in afghanistan has a relationship to the willingness of pakistan to take on the fact that safe havens exist in the border regions. we're going to be working with and have been working with the pakistani authorities to make sure that we do everything that we can do not only convince them of the urgency of the moment, not just for afghanistan but for pakistan and the region itself, and we are entering on a new relationship, a new strategic partnership, with the pakistanis in order to signal that we're not just interested in a short-term relationship where we solve the problem and late, but a long-term relationship that will affect

the future of pakistan and in areas far beyond security. we have to establish good security in the region. and then turn to economic development and other ways in which we can help pakistan and afghanistan become the nation's we hope that they will become, as stable partners, economically secure, and working toward a brighter future for all of their citizens. but this is a work in progress, and we are working diligently to achieve that goal. we have a number of high-level engagements with the pakistani authorities going back several months now, and these will continue in the months ahead. it is without question one of the most important things that we're taking on in order to be successful in the region. it is critical that we be successful there. and part of that is making sure

that they understand how did you when we are and how we view this in a long-term commitment. >> time for one more. james? >> there are reports about the speed with which troops are getting into afghanistan for the surge. as we learned in our right, there is a cycle. but there is also concerned that the troops will not be there in the numbers that we will need to reach that virtual cycle. can you talk about that for a moment? >> getting troops deployed to a country like afghanistan is much more difficult than going to iraq. the logistics of the fact of it being a landlocked nation make it much more difficult. it may -- it takes more time. we have good estimates from

admiral mullen and secretary gates won when the majority will close. they're working overtime to make that happen and it is important thatúio happened within the timelines that the president was briefed on in our strategic review. i think that we will achieve that. >> the general has to go. i thank you very much for your comments and please join me in thanking the general for his comments. >> thank you very much. >> if i could ask our next panel to please come up. ñiñiour next panel will be chaid

by my colleague who is a national security senior policy analyst here and she brings to this position terrific background. she has been at the council on foreign relations and has been in pakistan to observe the elections. she has really done a lot of work. >> we have an excellent panel, here. general jones just discussed this. we want to talk about the state department's recently released report that spelled out in much more detail.

whether this is a reintegration with the taliban, what to raise a number of questions that were sparked for me when i read the remarks. as you're giving your remarks, hopefully you will think of this. the first is, does the u.s. government have the capacity to undertake this that is a huge list. can we rebuild afghanistan's agriculture structure? secretary clinton and jones

talked about the fact that this is not nation-building. this actually looks quite a bit like nation-building. can we undertake such an agenda? the second question that comes to my mom and is can we do this? can we do it with our current partner? the cabinet is in complete -- it has pushed back a little bit the final question that comes to me , if that cracks down on the insurgents, do we have the environment to be able to undertake these initiatives? if there is not the original agreement, i will see if there

is anything in there. let me quickly introduced the panelists and then we will have them speak he has lived and worked in afghanistan since 1993. one of his major achievements has been to build the rule of law programming. that includes work on establishing relations between afghanistan state and nine state systems. he was also a legal adviser from 2002-2004 to afghanistan's constitutional and judicial reform commission's where he assisted in the new constitutional and judicial system. he has also worked for international development.

he has a lot of experience. he has worked as a u.n. official in afghanistan. carl is the vice president of policy. he came after spending five years in afghanistan. two ministers of finance and policy reform, he was the senior in the government. prior to that, he worked for care international. he was also the chairman of a nonprofit organization. he was the founder of the human

rights research and advocacy consortium in afghanistan. james serves as the director of the pakistan task force for usaid. he is responsible for assistance to afghanistan and pakistan. he holds the rank of minister counselor and has extensive experience in international development in the middle east, north africa and asia. he served as the senior deputy administrator for the middle east. he also served as the deputy administrator for asia and he has held a number of other important jobs in india, islamabad, and was the director of u.s. aid congressional delegation to office from 2000- 2003. i will now turn it over to jim. we will then follow with alex

and then paul. jim, thank you. >> thank you, very much. çóthank you for inviting us and usaid. general jones did an excellent job of laying out the strategic and policy imperatives of the barack obama of administration. ñii would notñi pretend to elabe on that. i will takeñi one " from presidt obama is añi speech at west poit in early december were he said çóthat we needed a civilian presence on the ground and the region, particularly afghanistan. our efforts will fail if we shortchange this effort. our efforts will fail in afghanistan if we do not invest in their future. we expect to beñi involved in afghanistan and pakistan for quite a long time on the

civilian side. we're committed to building a lasting partnership said you heard general jones talk about that. as c as theñi civilian uplift and some have called it -- as some have called it, is a civilian operation. ov0 american officers. it is our target in afghanistan. this has more than tripled our numbers from where we were one year ago. we are well on our way towards that. we will hit those numbers. it is not just our own american offices, we will be hiring a lot more afghan staff that will be directly working with usaid. these are a lot of our professional brains