enhancing capabilities. host: should they be restricted? . that is hotly debated because there's a thin line between getting for animals that are sick versus for growth enhancing possibilities. when we as health officials get called before a hearing, for example, the f.d.a. is pushing towards using antibiotics appropriately for animals that are sick but gradually phasing it out of just putting it into the feed normally for growth enhancing. so, when officials from the f.d.a. were testifying at various hearings, they made it clear that the appropriate use of antibiotics in animals is the way to go but we should be phasing out of just normally putting it into feed. but that has created a considerable amount of controversy particularly among the animal growers, the people responsiblfor the an halls who feel -- animals who feel

strongly that is positive even though it has the potential danger of reducing resistance. host: what is your personal opinion? guest: well, as an infectious disease person the fundamental mechanisms that lead to resistance are givg antibiotics in situations when they are not needed for infection. so on pure infectious disease principles i'm concerned about that practice because even thgh they may not have definitive data to show the link, the scenario of giving antibiotics when the animal is not really sick is a set-up potentially for that. host: how many -- do you know how many prescriptions for penicillin have been written in the last year or how much stronger the penicillin is than it used to be because of resistance issues? guest: i can't give you an exact number. it must be in the hundreds of millions the last several years. and it is not just penicillin.

we think of the prototype antibiotic aspen sillen -- as penicillin but there are others that are widely used. that story is a very interesting story. when penicillin was first introduced widel in the 1940's and 1950's virtually all the microbes that we used it for, all the common infections, were highly sensitive to penicillin. as we used it over the years certain organisms, particularly staph infections became resistant to penicillin. then we substituted another drug and we saw resistance to that with staph diseases which is worrisome because that means it is going in the dection of being more resistant. so there is a gradual evolution. and if you use penicillin as the prototype there are more microbes that years ago used to be highly sensitive to

penicillin that are no longer sensitive to it. host: let's take some calls. first up is dr. stokes a democrat from reston, virginia. please go ahead with your question for dr. fauci. caller: i'm a ob-gyn and what i find the two biggest problems are, one, marketing drugs, unsophisticated doctors that use high powered drugs. secondly, primary care doctors who ha yet -- family practice people are taught to use high-powered drugs on simple drugs and now i can't treat gonorrhea with cypro and others are going away because too damn many doctors are havg marketed high-powered drugs when the simple ones will work so you

need to something about marketing drugs to doctors. you should not have people saying you should use my -- host: we got the point. let's get an answer. guest: the point is well taken. what he is referring to is it is almost like using a cannon when you could use a pistol. if somebody comes in with an infection that is likely sensitive to an antibiotic that is not a real blockbuster that can knock virtually any microbe out, if you use your heavy weapons against things that don't need happy weapons, at the end of a perd of time those heavy weapons will not be as effective against the microbes that you need them for. so what dr. stokes is referring to is sometimes the drug companies come in and market a really god drug, one -- aeally good drug that is good for serious infections but they market it so the physicians who rely on that information might use it for something that is really what we call overkill. you don't really need that

antibiotic. host: next call for dr. fauci is new york city, annette. caller: good morning, c-span, and dr. fauci. i work in aublic hospital in new york and i'm a nurse at home. theatients are swamped for mrsa. is it true most healthcare workers carry these organisms because they are exposed? guest: i'm not sure that is the reason why they may not. it varieses from hospital to hospital. some a tested particularly when there is the suspicion or history of outbreaks in a particular facility like a nursing home. but you are correct. when you have hospitals, nursing homes and long-term care facilities, that is one of the post problematic areas in the sense that we have seen outbreaks of resistant microbes in those particular facilities. there's been a history the past

couple of years of outbreaks in nursing homes of an antibiotic that can cause serious gastrointestinal problems and can be resistant to the usual antibiotic. so the point is well taken. if people don't practice the hygiene that they should be practici practicing, they can often get the microbes on their own hands and person. health care workers, we have strict rules that you can lose accreditation if you don't do it. you have to wash your hand with a sanitize are before you go into a room with the patient and after you come out. if you do that religiously you are certain to cut down on the carriage by healthcare workers of microbes. host: next call is farmingtop, maine. caller: what i wted to know is as an individual who doesn't use antibiotic unless necessary is that any advantage to that person taking it or is it not an

advantage to being healthy a not doing antibiotics? guest: when you say advantage, that means when you need it, it will work on you. is that what you are saying? what do you mean by advantage? caller: is there any advantage to doing everything that you are saying as a health care worker and not to prescribe antibiotics if you get somody that is health conscious and doesn't use antibiotics is, there any advantage to them as far as the diseas diseases? guest: let me answer the question quickly and in two parts. if you are a person who has not inappropriately used antibiotics, the chances of your evolving within yourself a resistant microbe to common antibiotics is less than someone who uses antibiotics even though it is not particularly necessary. so, there is something that you can do by not demanding of your physician to put you on an antibiotic when you really don't need one. that is one thing. the other thing is that there is

the evolution now and this is very troublesome of what is called community acquired resistant microbes. we used to get staph only if you went into a hospital and got it from the environment of the hospital. we are seeing how up to 50% of the staph are community acquired, that you might just get it being outside in the community. we see that among athletes, direction, wrestlers and football players who can get a resistant microbe by contact with somebody who has it and it has nothing to do with their on antibiotic history. dr. fauci, your next call is from vista, california, jules. caller: good morning. i was just wondering and want to health you know a little secret that has been around a long time. 1957 i made my first cruise to the pacific in the navy. at that time what they would do,

there was so much gone raorrheay would put a whole big bottle of penicillin tablets on the quarter deck. the way it was posed to work was if you had contact on the beach you were supposed to take one of these penicillin tablets when you came back off the beach. instead of doing that, what a lot of guys would do because if you got gonorrhea you got restricted so they would pick up these tablets and hang on to them. then ifhey came down with gone reia, they would take the tablets on their own. and that -- the next thick you hear is, well, penicillin don't work no more. guest: well, that is not a secret. that is well known that that happened. that is unfortunate. that is just an example. you don't want to fault what the

navy did. there was so much -- that is another story. on some of those cruises and locations where our armed forces had to be involved there was such a high degree of gonorrhea that it was almost a factory type o giving penicillin to individuals. if you get infected you should be treated for the intpefrpblgts you shouldn't just take it because you tnk you might have gotten ineffected. the best way to prevent it is t use a condom. host: where do we stand now on antibiotics? we have the correct formulas to fight any disease? do we just keep making them stronger? guest: we mostly do. the challenge we face -- and this is what the congressional hearing that i and tom friedan, the director of the c.d.c., we both testified a week and a half ago at a hearing that was

directed exactly at your question namely what about the pipeli of antibiotics that we have to meet this challenge of antimicrobial resistance evolution. we stillave very god boots but -- very good antibiotics but we are running out of some of the first line ones. the real challenge is how to stop it and in addition to stopping it, if it is such that you can't sp it, you have to have a pipeline of new antibiotics to replace the ones to which theicrobe is resistant to. and we need to develop partnerships with the farm suit companies to -- pharmaceutical companies to get new and better antibiotics. and there really isn't that inceive. if you look at the new products that have come out the past couple of decades, very, very

feof them are brand-new antibiotics. so >> that is the point i made when i was talking about the hand sanitizers their pure alcohol. it is unlikely you will get resistant microphones. it actually has anti-bacterial capabilities. if you use it widely enough, you'll get resistant microbes. it has the same potential danger that we mentioned about giving antibiotics to livestock,

even though they're not sick. whenever you give an antibiotic to a situation that is not specific to a microbe, there is the potential for the evolution of resistance that >. host:, this is 62% ethyl alcohol the next call comes from michigan. caller: have a question and comment. i am allergic to penicillin. i've been told this my entire life. i got some really sick once. i went to the hospital. for someone like me, is it better to not go after something that is a substitute, or just not take anything at all. >> that is guest: that is a good question. there are a lot people that are

allergic to penicillin. it is a common allergy. if you have an infection, and you need an antibiotic, you absolutely should be on an antibiotic, one that substitutes the penicillin. there are several different class of antibiotics that work by mechanisms of different than what penicillin works at, but they are equally as effective if you get an infection, just because you are you -- to penicillin, it does not mean you should not take antibiotics at all. he should take an antibiotic at the advice of a physician that would avoid the elegy to penicillin, but that would be effective against the microbe. host: palm beach county florida. rachel. caller: i have been practicing chinese medicine for 30 years.

one of the first things we learned were that if four people were in a room and one of them has a cold, and the next day, two of the others have a cold, in western medicine, we would try to find out what the term was to attack the germ. in eastern medicine, would just say how come the other guy did not get the cold? what we try to do is raise the immune system. i wonder why there is not more going on to teach how to raise your a new system, and for western medicine to move in that direction. host: dr. anthony fauci? >> there is a lot of work going on about a puppet scenarios in which you want to boost the body's immune system. system -- what she is referring to is the natural defenses is the body's immune system.

the only problem is there are certain scenarios in which an infection that you get exposed to you are still going to get infected. so the person in the room who didn't get infected, that is just really the natural distribution of what we call attack rates of infection. it is extremely unusual that you will get an infection in a community that everybody will get infected. that is a scenario that probably has never happened. however, the ones that don't get infected, there may be a variety complicated reasons why they didn't get infected. so to say if you just boost up the immune syem, that is not necessarily the case. having said that, it is important to understand the mechanisms of the immune system and where to boost it. tkpwhr is this -- host: is this all a personal

position or does it carry over in your genes? guest: it doesn't carry over in the genes but what we call a propensity to allergic responses certainly is inherited and can be seen in families. if you have a family history of allerg it could be hay fever, it could be allergy to a variety of substances. it could be drug allergy. if you have a family history, the chances of your being allergic is greater than someone wh doesn't have a family histor but it is not an all or none phenomenon. there are some that have no family history of allergies who get a very serious drug reaction. and there are people who have a heavy family history of allergy who never get a drug reaction. so, it is not an all or none phenomenon, but there is a contrition of hereditary. host: an article that says the

use of antibiotics has possibly led to the increase in allergies in this country, have you seen that article? guest: yes, but that is really confusing. so, if you use drugs a lot and expose somebody to any substance, after a period of time in a population there will be more allergic responses to t it. whether that is just the fact there are people who inherently will be allergic and the support you treat you will notice more who are allergic, but there is no real evidence if you give a lot of antibiotics in a given person that person will get an allergy. host: jim from manatau beach, michigan. caller: thank you for c-span. it is a wonder we d't get this news coverage on the commercial networks and that is sad. i guess they are just all being

bought off. my question, doctor, i have fact ary farm -- factory farm, a dairy farm a few miles from my home and they are constantly spreading millions of gallons of their waste fertilizer and stuff all over the local farm fields here. and this bacteria -- not bacteria -- the antibiotics that they are putting in these things, they went from like 1le 800 -- they went from 1800 goes to almost 7,000. and antibiotics that are in that manure are bng spread on the fields and you have runoff from this. now, i have a pitch pond. -- i have a fish pond. do i have to worry about that and stuff breeding in that? guest: it depends on the concentration. e point you make is something that is being actively discussed about one of the real dangers of the widespread use of feed is

when you have waste from the animal particularly manure that runs off into the ground or streams that you will wind up getting the antibiotics themselves or even some of the resisting mike roebgs. i don't think it necessarily means a direct threat to the fish in your pond because it is going to depend on the concentration. and even if there is antibiotics it may not have an effect so i wouldn't say it is an absolute danger. i think you would have to check that and see what the concentrations of bacteria and antibiotics are in the runoff into your stream. i don't think it is an absolute sin kwa none that you have a danger to your fish. host why do they call the antibiotics in animals a growth hormone? guest: there are certain mechanisms that are not well understood. it alters the bacterial flora of the animal's intestine that allows it -- and this is

speculative but likely a contribution that allows the animal to greatly absorb more efficiently nutrients that makes it bigger, stronger and bulkier with more muscle. that is what they mean. it is not just growth hormone, it likely works by altering the bacterial flora. host: do you personally eat meat that has growth hormone? guest: a-i don't eat much meat at all. i'm not a pure vegetarian but close. when i do i have no idea whether the meat came from an animal that was given antibiotics. host: next call is a democrat from long island. caller: there is no disrespect from you but the problem and this is similar to [inaudible].

when you are in front of congress and you talk to these people, give tell medical answers. this is wrong, this is right. don't give political answers because it has a tendency to let you agree with them. so stay away from the politics of medicine and gave tell straightforward medical answers. host: caller, are you suggesting that dr. fauci doesn't give that, he gives politic answers? caller: there is a 10 enofeny seu -- for a long time i have been observant. i almost literature to c-span -- listen to c-spanvery morning and there are too many political answers when the leaders are in front of congress. guest: so, let me for the record i have been testifying before conggess for about 26 or 27 years and i have never, ever given a political ly corrected answer. they rely on me and trust me because i give a completely

scientifically based answer. so i can understand his concern that some people with the aura of the congress feel they have to give a political acorrect answer. host: why are you still in public service? guest: because i love it. it is the most imptant thing i can do with my ability, energy and talents. my way of getting the greatest impact of the things i do is in public service. and i wouldn't trade it for anything. host: with antibiotic resistance what are some of your other fields you oversee at n.i.h.? guest: probably the most visible i'm in charge of the aids research program of n.i.h. and we do all of the research that is involved with developing the drugs that have been so successful in transforming lives of people with h.i.v. i'm responsible for the malaria, tubercosis tphepged tropic-- neglected tropical diases. as well as a variety of other

issues. so there is a very robust portfolio that i'm responsible for. host: would you like to see d.d.t. used again to prevent malaria? guest: that is a broad question. you have to be more specific. i think that the issue of completely banning d.d.t. resulted unfortunately in a re surpb resurge generals of the mosquito -- resurgence of the mosquito populations in certain regions of the world. i don't think you should haphazardly use d. it d.t. but most health officials feel completely dropping its use for insect control was not the right choice. host: when it comes to aids and h. eufp h.i.v. drugs are you finding that gerations are getting resistant to thearlier ones? guest: as we discussed earlier in the show, whenever you use widely an antibiotic or antiviral you will have the

natural evolution of resistance. certainly a certain percentage of the h.i.v. are resistant to some of the drugs. fortunately, we have such a robust menu of antiviral drugs for h.i.v., more than 30 individual drugs have been approved by the f.d.a. in this country, that even though you have sistance, you very often, fact almost always you can find another combination of anti-h.i.v. drugs that would suppress it. so resistance is something you don't want to take lightly we have been able to circumvent that because we have so many good drugs. host: 15 minutes left with our guest dr. anthony fauci. boca raton, florida. caller: my kquestion, i read a recent article that said it is now becoming an infectious

disease and that the h-pylore is resistant to firstine drug treatment and many people are having second and third treaents because it is coming back. host: what is h-pylori? >> it is a bacteria that affects the g.i.tract. guest: it is a fascinating medical story in that forever, for decades and decades, people thought that alwaulcers were du stress and a variety of other factors when in fact the overwhelming majority of gastric ulcers are due to a microbe referred to as h-pylori which inhacketts the -- inhabits the upper attract of people.

when that was discovered which one a nobel prize for that, when that was discovered aibiotics clearly were used to get rid of the h-pylori and dramatically decreased the you willers. and -- ulcers. and the more you use antibiotics, microbes will find a way to survive that and mutate and developresistance. that has happened with some strains. but fortunately we have alternative drugs for it. so what you need to do if you have h-pylori you have to make sure you are deem with an organism that is sensitive to the antibiotics that the physician chooses to use for the treatment of that person. .

caller: i hope your organization will give more attention to the fact that the way to cut down the use of these antibiotics and the epidemic is you can read about at eradicate limediease.org host: thank you, fred. dr. anthony fauci? guest: it has turned out to be problematic. we stood in the have a good vexing. the real issue with lyme disease is that it is and inevitably

treatable. there are some that even doubt it truly exists when you group the number of diseases and to what is cost chronic lyme disease. there's a lot of controversy and debate about that. the recommendation of infectious disease in societies with great experiences the city should not use the very long-term antibiotics for what is considered to be chronic lyme disease. there's been a lot of debate and controversy. host: our antibiotics used in the h1n1 shot? guest: not at all. it is a virus. you do not used antibiotics against the virus. if you get a shot of the h1n1, that is a vaccine that is used to prevent infection. if you happen to get infected to -- infected with h1n1, then you fall into a high risk

category or you get a significantly hill, there are anti-viral drugs, tamiflu and others that can be used for h1n1 and other influences, but you would not want to give an antibacterial drug, an antibiotic, that is done, for influenza, that is a very common and -- for influenza. is it a common illness. host: call comes in from new jersey. caller: i wanted to know about the study that you did in 1991 when i was up ere. the medication was bactram and folic acid. is there anything new on th? guest: yes, there is. the study that we did in the 70's and 80's -- in the 1970's and 1980's was for serious

diseases, particularly kidney disease. host: unrelated to our conversation is this week. mike allen is reporting that kagan half will be president obama supreme court pick. wisconsin. caller: thank you for taking my call. have been watching a program for over four months and taking notes.

i have been interested in alternative medicine of my life. i am going on 63-years-old. what i have learned from this doctor is the importance of taking probe by ethics when you take antibiotics yet, they have the evidence to support that, but most doctors do not do that. host: what is a probiotic? guest: if you take one it counters the effect of the antibiotic that you are giving for a specific infection. it is also going to knock out a bunch of other bacteria that are

probably causing you no harm, because although it is specific for the one that is giving you a problem, it will also kill others. it repopulate the harmless or good bacteria. pulate the harmless, or good, and bacteria. most people do not necessarily el that you have toive that and the overwhelming majority of physicians do not do that. host: what about yogurt and othethings? guest: yogurt is good and there are some harmless bacteria and there are microbes that are harmless and symbiotic and work well in your body without calling disease. host: mass., your honor.

caller: thank you for your long public service to all of us. is there an antibiotic better than most to treat pediatric your infections? -- your infectionear infections? i am hearing a amoxicillin, and it repeats itself. guest: let's break it up into two components. there are good antibiotics. a amoxicillin that you just mentioned is the classic antibiotic for a job with an infection. pneumococcus is a common cause of middle ear infections in children and pneumonias in children and adults, particularly elderly adults. we have a very good vaccine against pneumococcus that we give to children and the

elderly. what we really need to do is to get more children vaccinated with the pneumococcal vaccine so they do not end up with these your infections that are so troublesome. -- ear infections that are so troublesome. host: i know someone who gave their infant as acipro for an infection. guest: that is not good for children. physicians generally universally say you should not do that with children under 13 years old. host: with the recent scarce that we've had, acipro became a familiar word to all of us.

has it been overused? guest: probably, it has. whenever you get an antibiotic that is commonly thought of as a really good antibiotic, you would almost certainly see some inappropriate use of that. i cannot give you the numbers of how badly it is overused, but i cannot imagine that it is not used in circumstances where it probably should not be used. it is a very good antibiotic. host: michigan. caller: doctor, i've liked to have more appropriate use of kordell minerals -- colloidal minerals in the water rates, for example and i would like to see

them on a national scale. host: y reaction to that call? guest: there i no scientific basis to do that at all. host: teresa, go ahead. caller: if i have an autoimmune system, such as diabetes, does that mean my system more susceptible to bacterial and anti- -- and viral infections? you had mentned the intestines allow for more absorption of nutrients, but doesn't it also allows for more absorptions of toxins? guest: two entirely separate questions. the first, if you haven't -- if you have diabetes, there is a greater susceptibility mostly to

a certain bacterial infections among people with diabetes, particularly poorly controlled diabetes. that is a well-known observation since we have recognized diabetes as a disease. getting dr. the question regarding -- getting back to the question regarding the changing the flora of the gut, you do not change the lining of the debt. you change the bacterial composition of the colonies of the gut. that would allow for more efficient absorption of certain nutrients. there is no indication when you do that that there are more toxins released. because the animals, if anything, are much healthier, rather than getting sick. if you were observing toxins,

you would see the effect on the animals, and you do not see that. host: last fall in virginia. -- last call in virginia. caller: a couple of years ago, abouseven years ago, i was treated for non-hodgkin's lymphoma. a treatment with other chemotherapy agents. the very soon after, my thyroid decreased significantly and my levels -- might t h c levels went up. is there any link re? guest: you have four powerful side of toxic and immunosuppressive agents.

there is no one directly between an decressin function and the use of those, but it is not surprising -- between endocrine function and the use of those, but it is not surprising that when people undergo treatment for something like hodgkin's disease, there would be some of new melik -- abnormalities. it grows to be something unrelated, but since you had such a reaction, i would not be surprised that there is a relationship between that and your subsequent function. host: how much money is spent on research for antibiotics? guest: my institute does the invest majority of that. i would not say, all of it is done by us, b we spent a short of $800 million per yearn antibiotic research. of that, about to enter million dollars is specifically to study antibiotic resistance.

-- about $200 million in specifically to study antibiotic resistance. host: if you, wanted to say anything to the people of the country that are listening about the use of antibiotics, what would you say? guest: there are many life- threatening things that needed antibiotics, but do not pressure your physician or yourself to go on antibiotics unless you have a bacterial infection that is proven o bear very -- or very, very highly suspected of being in you. and you will not do your body any good by creating g a resistance. >> we leave this part of

""washington journal"." coming up, at two o'clock p.m. we have more live coverage of the commerce department forum on the internet and consumer privacy. until then, remarks on the nation from the unemployment numbers. president obama spoke from the white house this morning. >> good morning, everybody. on what seems like a daily basis, whatever arrived with statistics, data and reports about the health of the economy. from the first days of this

administration, amidst the worst economic crisis since the great depression, i have said the truest member opposite the truest measure of progress would be whether or not we are creating jobs. that is what matters -- of that is what matters in people put the lives. can they achieve some measure of economic security? everything we have done has been with this goal in mind. today, i am happy to report some encouraging news. in april, the economy added two and 90,000 jobs, with the vast majority, approximately two and 30,000 coming from the private sector. this is the largest monthly increase in four years. we created 141,000 more jobs in february and march than previously estimated, which means we announcing job growth for four months in a row. these numbers are harkening when we consider where we were one year ago, with the economy in free fall. at the height of the downturn,

we were losing 7 and 50,000 jobs per month. this news comes on the heels of the news took the overall output, our gdp, is increasing. steady growth is starting to give business a conference to expand and hire new people. i should also note that the unemployment rate ticked up slightly, from 9.7% to 9.9%. this may seem contradictory, but it is largely a reflection of the fact that workers who had dropped out of the work force entirely, are now seeking jobs again. they're encouraged by better prospects. now, i want to emphasize, the economic crisis has inflicted a lot of damage and families and businesses across our country. it will take time to repair and

billed parrot with the course of this recession, more than 8 million jobs were lost. there are a lot of people experiencing real hardship. today put the numbers, while welcome, leaving us with a lot of work to do. it will take time to achieve a sustained job growth that is necessary long before the recession hit, for one ticket, middle-class sections -- families had been facing declining economic security. we have a ways to go, but we'll also come a long way. you can see that the difficult, and at times unpopular steps to be taken are making a difference. productivity is up. the hours people are working are up. both are signs that companies might be hiring more workers in the months to come. we saw the highest increase in manufacturing employment since 1998, and we can see the benefit of our recovery act in the strongest employment reports

from construction and other sectors where we have made key investments in creating and saving jobs. there are limits to what the government can do. the true engine of job growth in this country will always be the private sector, which is why we are very pleased to see strong growth on the private sector side. with the government can do is help create the conditions for companies to hire again, build the infrastructure, offered incentives that will help small businesses and workers, and lead manufacturers to set up shop, not overseas, right here, in the united states of america. that is what we have been doing. a number of steps are taking effect. because of a bill i signed into law, businesses are eligible for tax cuts for hiring unemployed workers. companies are ready to write off investments. we are spiriting -- we are

spearheading new jobs. in addition, 4 million small businesses recently received a postcard telling them they are eligible for a health-care tax cut that is worth perhaps tens of thousands of dollars for each of these companies, and will provide welcome relief for small business owners who too often have to choose between health care and hiring. we still have more to do. in my state of the union address, i called for a small business lending fund, which would help increase the credit flow. obviously, small businesses are a major source of job creation. this morning, we sent draft legislation to congress on this. the state initiative, which was designed with the help of governors and members of both the house and the senate, will

help extend landing for small businesses and manufacturers at a time when budget shortfalls are leaving states to cut back on vitally important lending programs. in addition, the state and local governments facing huge budget gaps are laid-off police officers, teachers, and other essential public servants, which not only harms the economy, but the committee and the economy as a whole. we're working with congress to find ways to keep our teachers in the classrooms, our police officers on the beat, and our firefighters on the call. i also propose giving people rebates to update the energy efficiency of their homes. this will not only save money for families, to create jobs in construction and manufacturing sectors. things like windows and insulation are overwhelmingly made in the united states of america. i was glad to see a bipartisan

vote in the house of representatives yesterday. i'm calling on the senate to act as well. i am urging congress to expand the clean energy manufacturers' tax credit, which is helping to create jobs across america building when turbines and solar panels. even as we have taken the steps, where also mindful of other economic factors that can emerge. i want to speak to the unusual i want to speak to the unusual market activity that place on wall street yesterday. the regulatory authorities are evaluating this closely, which concern for protecting investors and preventing this from happening again. i will make findings public, along with recommendations for a private action. i also spoke with german chancellor angela merkel regarding the economic and financial the elements in europe. we agreed on the importance of a strong policy response and a strong financial -- financial response. i made it clear that the united

states supports these efforts and will continue to operate with european authorities and the imf during this fiscal period. this week of the jobs numbers, as a relief to the americans found a job, but offers little comfort to those that are still out of work. to those are still looking, i give you my word that i am going to keep fighting, every single day, to create jobs and opportunities for people. every one of my team the standing alongside me has the same sense of mission. we will not rest until we put this fiscal chapter behind us, and i will not rest until you come and millions of your neighbors, caught up in the storms, are able to find a good job and reach a brighter day. thank you, very much. >> mr. president, have you made a decision on the supreme court?

this weekend, the author of the books "the business of happiness." sunday night on c-span. >> this weekend on c-span to, 10 years after doing the crime, piper carmen spent 15 months in prison. her book is "orange is the new black."

new books from first ladies. you can find the entire schedule at booktv.org. >> the president got on the phone and said to me, a judge, i would like to announce you as my selection to be the next in united states supreme court judge. i caught my breath and started to cry, and said thank you, mr. president. >> learn more about the nation's highest court in c-span's latest book "the supreme court." the supreme court is available in hardcover and as an e-book.

>> the outcome of the british elections is still up in the air. lamont -- liberal democrats have 57 seats. next, we show you this morning's statements from the three party leaders appeared first is nick clegg, who says conservatives ought to be given the chance to form a government. after that, gordon brown expressing willingness to come to a coalition, and then david kirk -- david cameron, saying he will make a comprehensive office -- offer. now, the statement from british party leaders. [applause]

>> thank you for coming. last night was a disappointment for the liberal democrats. even though more people voted for us than ever before, even though we won a higher proportion of the vote than ever before, it is a source of great regret for me that we have lost some really valued friends and colleagues and returned to parliament with fewer seats than before. many people, during the election campaign, were excited about the prospect of doing something different, but it seems that when they came to vote, many of them, in the end, i decided to stick with what they knew best. at a time of great economic uncertainty, i totally understand those feelings. that will not stop me from

double in my efforts to show that real change is the best reassurance that things can get better for people and their families, and that it should not be something that unsettles people. now, we are at a very fluid political situation, which no party in joining an absolute majority. it seems to me, it is phytol that all the different parties, all of the political leaders, act in the national interest, and not out of narrow political investment. i also said that whichever party gets the most vote, in the most weeks, if not an absolute majority, has the right to seek the government, either on its own, or by reaching out to other parties appeared i stick to that view. it seems this morning, that it is the conservative party that

has more boots -- more votes. they're not an absolute majority. i think it is time for the conservative party to prove that his capable of seeking to governing the national interest. at the same time, this election campaign has made it abundantly clear that are the electoral system is broken. it simply does not reflect the hopes and aspirations of the british people. i repeat again my assurance, whatever happens in the coming hours, days, and weeks, i will continue to urge for greater fairness and economic responsibility, but also, for these expensive, real reforms that we need to fix or broken political system thank you very much. >> you can attach the other

speeches from the british elections on the other c-span networks. now, we would join a forum taken place at the commerce department. >> i thought we might sell more seats and bring in some lunchtime of letters if we build it as a afternoon delight. i did not win that fight. i see what secretary locke talking about this morning. i feel like the umpire at a test -- at a tennis match. the secretary highlighted some of the astonishing statistics about the growth of electronic commerce, and our reliance on the internet. among other statistics, on-line transactions today are estimated to total $10 trillion annually,

and are expected to pass and $24 trillion by the year 2020. this remarkable statistics actually understate the impact of the internet and of the digital economy in this era. they do not measure the massive amounts of data that are moved across the internet, mind by economics and corporations for research, taking advantage of the best increases of computing power. they do not measure the efficiency gains for businesses that use business-to-business techniques for inventory

management. they do not measure the welfare gains for consumers, from increased choice and competition globally. as the previous panel discussed, in the discussion of the innovative uses of personal information, increasingly common data has been used to personalize on-line experiences, make recommendations, and connected with many different kinds of communities across the globe. nor, do these statistics measure the full impact of the internet on our society today. it is not only a vehicle for economic transactions, it is the backbone of by which we communicate to date. it flattens organizations. it decentralizes politics.

it changes the way we communicate with family, and with friends, and with colleagues. i watched this unfold as a communications lawyer, going back to the days of the computer inquiry, and as a consumer, back to the days of a text-based internet accounts. when i came to the department of commerce, i knew and came there with a sense that we have a special responsibility of stewardship for the internet and for electronic commerce. i recalled that in 1997, the department of commerce was a leader in establishing the global framework for electronic commerce. it is with that role in mind

that we have launched the internet test scores, and launched this privacy inquiry, and other inquiries to follow. in doing that, i have had in mind the role of one of my predecessors at the department of commerce. andy was a leader in formulating some of the best thinking around a range of internet issues. along with our morning panelists, larry irvin, when he was the assistant secretary, and he knew that if we were going to build the internet to its potential, the united states government needed the right touch in the process. so, it is an honor to pick up

that banner of leadership. as one simple message that i want to leave you with, in this field, the department of commerce is back. we are it is a model that we want to carry forward as we update the framework for blow bull digital economy in the 21st century. because our continued economic recovery and tomorrow's prosperity depends on a tax sector that is able to innovate and expand into new technologies and applications. we are back because the internet depends on trust to flourish.

we're back because the government has an importance, but delicate role to play in preserving trust and enabling this digital fabric society to flourish. trust and privacy are essential to the mission of this effort, central to the mission of the department of commerce. earlier this year, secretary lot established within the department a department wide internal privacy council which i chair. one of our first acts was to adopt a privacy mission statement for the department of commerce. it says that the department of commerce is committed to safeguarding personal privacy. individual trust in the privacy

and security of personally identifiable information is the foundation of trust in government and commerce in the 21st century. as an employer, as a collector of data on millions of individuals and companies, the developer of information management standards and a federal advisory on information management policies, the department strives to be a leader in best practices and privacy policy. to further these goals, the department assigned a high priority to privacy considerations in the whole system's programs and policies. to lead on the external facing privacy issues, we are committed to ensuring that we serve as a leader and an example for the u.s. government invest privacy

practices facing inward. hundreds of millions of americans trust the department of commerce with protected and sensitive census information. corporations trust us with trade secrets. applicants to our many grant programs trust us with their dreams and with their plans for the future. with this privacy symposium today, we are stepping up our outboard facing work. our objective in this is clear. we want to ensure that we preserve and protect everyone's access to an open global internet. where innovation and privacy can flourish side by side. as we began the public conversation, i want to tell you about a conference that larry

strickland and i attended last summer in colorado. our assignment there was to look at four different scenarios for the development of broad band. we were joined by leaders of the public sector, from congressional staffs, from the fcc, from private industry, carriers, programming providers, nonprofit leaders, free press, academics from across the country. we were divided into four groups. each group analyzed a different scenario. all four groups, independently, these are people who are not shy about disagreeing with one another, highlighted one driver, one risk in common for the continued development of the did digital -- a digital society. everyone of them framed it in

exactly the same terms. trust. trust. for me, this striking convergence, consensus, validates a valued principal for our work as we embark on this new framework. it is working for trust. the government has a vital role to play in bringing together many stakeholders like you today. to insure a foundation of trust that can be a driver for a secure and sustainable digital economy. as evidenced by today's symposium, we're proud to serve as a leader within the executive

branch in the continuing interagency conversation on these issues. we look forward to working with our colleagues at the ftc, at the state department, and across the government. i want to recognize some of those colleagues who are here today or who have been here today. the department of commerce and the federal trade commission have had a productive partnership and -- on privacy issues for many years. it is a relationship that we look forward to continuing. we're fortunate to have peer jessica rich, the ftc deputy director. she will appear on the next panel. i want to extend special thanks.

we have worked closely with the ftc on many issues. global trade issues and privacy issues, as many as you know. the u.s. european union safe harbor framework, the asia- pacific economic cooperation, the oecd working party, the trilateral committee on transborder data flows. as general counsel, i look forward to the job of upbringing the insides that you offer today, that you offer in response to our notice of inquiry to the ftc, and across the government. i also want to recognize

ambassador phil revere, the deputy assistant secretary and u.s. coordinator for international communications and information policy. enter mclaughlin -- andrew mclaughlin from os dp. thank you for your leadership and support on these important issues. we are truly fortunate to at the department of commerce to have with us the recognized expert and quality thinkers and leaders s. i want to thank mark, not just for his kind words of introduction, but for his

leadership, his vision, within the office of secretary. i want to think danny, not just for his work on this symposium, but for his brilliant work as a day-to-day leader of the department of commerce effort in this arena. will there are too many people to the knowledge individually, i do want to acknowledge the many staff from nyia, ita, nift, and across the department of commerce who worked hard on this issue and in preparation for the symposium. if you are here, please stand up and be recognized. [applause]

finally, i want to thank all of you. your participation in this symposium here today starts a new focus in our conversation. if you have not done so yet, please submit comments on our request for comments. we need to share your thoughts, to give us your insights as we grapple with the many difficult issues discussed today and outlined in the privacy notice inquiry. i said to somebody earlier, one of the striking things in this field, you can put together people with extraordinary intelligence, command of public policy, and familiarity with this area and have a discussion

with many thoughtful questions, but still struggling to finance -- find answers. our task is certainly not an easy one. this is nothing less than a day comprehensive -- this is nothing less than a comprehensive nexus between privacy and innovation in the internet economy. we're dealing with technology that moves faster than government policy can adapt, with changing consumer expectations, with multiplying global markets and regulatory regimes. we need to hear from you how the u.s. government can strike the right balance between privacy and innovation. we cannot address these issues without your help.

thank you for your participation in today's symposium. we look forward to continuing this partnership as we moved in to this next chapter of the internet age. thank you. [applause] >> it the catalyst for the next session would not mind coming up and populating -- if the catalyst for the next session would not mind coming up and populating these seats. before taking this job, i worked in corporate america for 20 years, 12 of those years with one particular company. i worked on many, many public policy initiatives and public policy initiatives succeeded win

we had support as a policy advocates from the executive suite. i think we just saw another indication of the strength of the support that we have as a policy staff at the commerce department from our executive suite. he could not have been more articulate and more demonstrable in showing the high level of support for this initiative across the executive chair of the department. with that, we will return. we pretty much have a continuation of the conversation that we had before lunch, although this panel has more focus from the business side than the earlier conversation. we will be drilling into brass tacks issues a little bit more. we will also not be endeavoring to do live demos of technology because we know those are

fraught with challenges. will be throwing up a few screen shots so that people can see what some of the development in the privacy tool arena have been occurring. before we move on to the brief demos and conversation, just a few framing remarks. i am one of those people who enjoys looking at the internet economy and the internet as a whole through an evolutionary lines. -- lens. humans and animal evolution never occurred at a continuous rate. rather, there were periods of

seeming stability and punctuated equilibrium. during these periods of equilibrium, the pace of evolution speeds up dramatically. the outcomes are highly unpredictable. what we have in the internet era, we have that type of rapid evolution, but in the commercial space and the development of social technologies. this brings tremendous benefits and policy challenges. one of the biggest policy challenges is that we see the pace of innovation of products and services moving out so fast and we all know that the pace of innovation and policy development moves at a tortoise speed by comparison. what do you do about that difference in time scale? we also, in this space, we know

that corporate leaders, innovators are constantly developing privacy enhancing technologies. we need to be honest that the development of privacy enhancement technologies is not quite yet at the same pace as the development of internet technologies and services. we have racing yacht had a bus the development of new services and new technologies -- racing out ahead of us the development of new services and technologies. lagging far behind, we have the development of policy and legislation. what do we do about the fact that these three things are in play and moving at different times skills? i did not have the answer. i do not know if any of us do. that is one of the purposes of this inquiry that we are doing. with that, let me pass it over

to a handful of folks who actually have been in the midst of developing these privacy enhancing technologies. they have been adapting -- michael lead off. -- mike will lead off. bbb is a great example of activity. 10 years ago, they recognize that the internet was a new thing and they established a program and were a leader and then and have continued to adapt it. then we have representatives from yahoo.com and at&t. they are leaders in this case also. once we get a few of their presentations, we will discuss what people think of them.

>> thank you, marc. i appreciate it. the opening comments i think i would like to kind of reconfirm or repeat general counsel kelly statement that innovation privacy can stand together. i did think -- i think there is no question that that is the point where we are at as an image -- as an industry. i think probably have the best job here today because i actually get to stand up and represent the collective wisdom and work of literally hundreds of companies that have come together to push the envelope on new innovative ways to push consumer notice, and up in powering consumer's choice. i do not want to spend a lot of time on the history and the process. suffice to say, which took a lot of cues from the ftc.

it is then a long process and an inclusive one. seven principles that i will talk about the choice and the transparency -- transparency principals today. these principles neutrally are revolutionizing the way consumers get information about how data is collected and used on line. it is also revolutionizing the scope in which they are empowered to opt out of that. just a little bit about the scope. when all is said and done, when you look at the steering committee made up of our partners with the direct marketing association, the association of national advertisers, that grew to many more trade associations and literally hundreds of companies

that come together to consider these principles at the board level of the steering committees. as we move toward the implementation, i want to point out. principals are great, but until you see it in the marketplace, you do not have a lot to stand down. you look at the collective membership of these trade associations, you're talking about 5000 leading companies. marketers, publishers, search engines. i would also commend the direct marketing association. they have already incorporated these principles into their member code of conduct. their members are beginning to come into compliance. let's really look at what we're talking about because fundamentally, there are two ways you can deliver notice to consumers. you can do it to the website.

you can do it the way third party. i want to focus on an example. this went live this week on publishers clearing house. if you look, this is an entire web site. it is targeted. they know that i live in vienna, virginia. if you look within the act itself, you will see the iconic trusty and you will see in notice there. -- if you look with anin the ad itself, you will see the icon trusty. this is outside the privacy policy. if we go to the next slide, the consumer gets an overlay that

takes over the entire page. it has a very clear information. it is very easy for them to opt out of this. that is a powerful tool. this is not how the industry has worked for the past 15 years. the privacy tools in this space are new and innovative. that is the key here today. let's look at the other example of consumer notice. this is third party notice. whether it is an advertisement network -- this is not a live demo. we did not have a budget to do advertising. this is a treatment that was mopped up by a company called better advertising. it was a compliance program. you have the notice within the ad.

nothing can be more easily discoverable by consumers then it being within the ad itself. if consumers want to find information, you get an overlay that takes over the ad. this is different from the first publisher notice because the third party does not have access to the entire web site. the kind of have to respect that territory, but it takes over the ad itself. there's plain english information about how the data is being collected. if they keep going forward and they want to opt out of the data collection and out of the targeting, it is very easy for them to do it. if we go to the next slide, you can see how easy it is to opt out of all of this. i wanted to show you to representations' of innovative, creative ways that the industry is implementing a new type of notice. the key with choice is to make

sure that the first-time, everybody in the ecosystem is complying and participating. that is the real evolution. there is nothing new about opt out, but to let everybody doing it, is the real key here. principals are great. we're seeing notice, choice. in the end, we also need accountability. i want to highlight -- lee is going to talk about better business bureaus. there is a serious commitment to enforcement here into compliance. with that, i will let lee takeover.

>> i am executive vice president of the council of better business bureaus. we are in the process of adapting. we will be 100 years old next year. i was not there when it started, but close. what i wanted to do today is talk to you about how self regulation can fit in with the department of commerce and their overall look at privacy principles. one of the things from this morning was what this space needs more than anything else is standards of flexibility. one of the hallmarks of any self-regulatory approach is flexibility. the problem is that when you go out and just do your basic google search on self regulation, you come up with

some pretty pejorative, widely held misconceptions about self regulations is. my favorite was an article that described self regulation as the bubonic -- the bubonic oxymoron. there is a different view of self regulation that we're trying to develop in this process that mike was just talking about. that is making a third party accountability program. the principles that were adopted have undertaken to construct just that. the idea is that you would have a third party conducting monitoring and oversight of companies' compliance with the principle. that is not really remarkable, but in addition, we both committed that we will be transparent about the monitoring.

if we find violations, which will report them publicly. it they are not corrected, we will refer them to the government. there is actually a track record here that shows that approach could work. we have administered for years an organization called the children's advertising review unit that look subtle advertising directed to children in any media. it has a specific set of principles on privacy. those principles, both parallel the protection act and go beyond it. these are standards developed by the industry. they are applied across the board to every industry member, whether or not the industry member has said they agreed to comply with them. the children's advertising review -- review unit monitors that space. in the last two years, they have had more than 50 reported decisions in that area. they have been under%

compliance. -- 100% compliance. we get it right back up from the federal trade commission. that is one version of self regulation. it is something that reports regulation. there is another version of self regulation that -- where is in lieu of regulation. most of the self regulatory activities for children, privacy and due involved provisions that go beyond basic provisions of the childrens' on-line privacy act. the back to where i started, i think that one of the things the department of commerce could be doing is trying to develop more of an alleged -- of an intellectual basis or support for the process of self regulation as part of the privacy protections. i just came from a meeting at

the ftc -- is a ground-breaking organization that the ftc put together to bring together consumer protection officials from all of the world to talk about coordinated standards and protection. i can tell you that the times -- even in this country, it could be better developed. that is the explicit goal of this program that we have undertaken with the support of many of the companies and the room and all of the advertising trade associations. thank you. >> those of us on the panel cannot see the slides. we're kind of reaching over.

i wanted to talk a little bit about how we are dealing with notice and twisted it. i have been to a lot of panels like this and it's sort of start off with this conversation about how notice and choice are dead. they're old and antiquated ideas. i actually think what nicole said this morning was instructive. in choice 10 years ago, it was kind of a two dimensional thing. when i was looking for the agenda for this event, i did a little search on ntia privacy. i came up with an agenda that was held in 2000. all of the same topics are being discussed 12 years ago. what is different is the way we are approaching them. when you think about notice and choice today, we're thinking about it in a different kind of way. when i first read it at yahoo.com we drafted a privacy policy and we put links to it on every single page. we thought it was kind of

revolutionary, the company would tell consumers what we collect and how we use it. we have tools today that we did not have available to us 10 years ago because we have a vault. the web is a very different place. if we were talking about this two years ago, we would not be talking about facebook or twitter. what we have done on yahoo!, we have implemented an icon on our front page and on our male page with the ads that the show there. -- on our mail page. what is about today is not having a document or a number of choices that you go tell consumers, go find it. read it. manage all of them someplace. it is about giving users the choices and the information they need in the context of their experiences. advertising and privacy in that

context is just one way we're doing that. we for started thinking about this, it was about three years ago. yahoo! has been serving ads on our site for 15 years. we worked with a number of great partners, including ebay and wal-mart, and we spent some time talking to them about how you provide privacy notices that your consumers know that yahoo! is involved in this transaction. what we came up was this idea of providing that information contextualized. the challenge in doing this from a publishers' standpoint is that every publisher has to go in and make changes on their site, on their templates. that is a rather difficult problem from seal ability standpoint.

we're always thinking in terms of scale. this is a fast-moving medium. the advertising ecosystem has gotten -- it is very different than it was 10 years ago when you have a publisher and an ad network and there was a contract and those two entities work together. today you have a lot of different players and the ecosystem is a lot more complicated. we were trying to think about how to make its scale. we do this from the ad network perspective than we could from the publisher perspective. the worked -- we have been testing a couple of different models. this is what we have been working on. a number of other companies work together to test this out. what was important, if you go to the next click, you'll see a blow up here. our friends at h-p are very well represented on our front page. the idea was to give our

consumers eight meaningful marker. there are ways to convey privacy information that are not so terribly helpful. everybody in the room has a credit card and it some point, you've got a privacy notice. a right? how many of you read them? that is still not very many, even in this audience. many, many trees have lost their lives. many billions of dollars have been spent in compliance. one of the things we were keen on doing here was to test this out, to find out whether it is helpful to consumers. if you click again, this is our landing paid and it shows you information, conveys some educational information. our goal is to really boiled this down. right now, we are testing and developing for later this year this idea of transmitting with the add some data about the ad.

when we serve an advertisement with an icon, we can convey through that at some information about to the advertiser was, could add that work is. we will be doing a lot more of this in the next year. click one more time. this is where it takes you today. this is where you would go to express your choices. we've launched the manager last year and our goal here -- and this was a long time in the works, was to be able to convey to the consumer some of the information we are using as part of this customization process. it is very simple. you can still opt out of all. we're giving a lot more information to consumers about what information we hold and how we're using it. a few years ago, there was a great deal of concern about showing this much information to consumers. ibm is transparent and giving

consumers as much information, it is incredibly in powering at it demystifies this whole process. when you talk to the consumer about what information is being collected, there is a sense that it will be awful. that is not what is being used to customizz advertising. we show you what we are using and we give you control over it. is allowing the consumer to engage with that. we are finding that it is demystify and giving people a great deal more comfort in how this whole process works. this is the clear at notice process. this is what we have launched. i want to get the size that there have been a lot of conversations about opt in purses opt out. we seem to always want to boil this conversation down into this

by mary set of choices. it is a spectrum of choices. there is not one way to do it. we tend to think of their model as being more of an opt out model, but we are doing that form of opt out with exceedingly clear notice to consumers. with this type of transparency and control, it is a very good way to go. >> i would also have slides, but i really want to be able to look and see what it is that we are saying. go to the first slide. to ann mentioned that the industry is getting really challenging. you have a web publishers, networks, isps, all kinds of actors in the ecosystem.

my company is highly challenging because we're all of those. within one company, trying to manage the different business interests as we talk about privacy, has been -- has produced some pretty good results. with their partnership with yahoo! and all the innovation sheet has talked about, we get the benefit of. i wanted to point out a couple of things that we practice. we're kind of the living at laboratory of this. -- living laboratory of this. we're the number one isp. we play in a web publisher -- we really do play all of these roles. how does one navigate through that in the new era of privacy? it starts with their privacy policy. i know it is tried and true and we can talk a lot about whether notice is sufficient, but i would like to point out one

feature. the collapse our privacy policy about a year-and-a-half ago from 17 policies into one. we did a huge redraft. we treated one-stop shop for privacy for all our lines of business. wireless, isp, publishing, all of that. we did so by drastically reducing the number of words. i could talk a lot about putting our videos up and all of that. the one feature i would highlight is the intentional intent to engage our customers. we did that by ruling out the new privacy policy with a 45-day preview period. we sent over 100 million notices to our customers through their bill inserts and also through a web campaign to say, check out our new privacy policy. drive them to our site and on our side, just when you get into the privacy policy, we said, tell us what you think.

by the way, a privacy policy is not going to be effective for 45 days. if you want to tell us what you think, we will wait to hear what you have to say and we will listen. we answered every one of our customers inquiries and 45 days later, lee made the privacy policy effective, we did, in fact, change the policy reflecting some of the concerns about language that was not clear. despite the fact that we have focus groups and early previews of all of this, we found that our customers made some really good point about unclear language. we changed it. it created all kinds of worry with their lawyers and all kinds of worries internal to the business of letting the customers how to write a policy. it turned out to be tremendously effective. it was well received and as we all know as privacy professionals, changing your terms of service in your privacy policy is a flashpoint in any

corporate life. the fact that we use the customers as our own laboratory was highly effective. i encourage everyone to do so. it was part of this process internally of recognizing engagements as the key to being an effective privacy policy advocate for customers. i did not know where we are on this permit a couple of other things -- that are interesting. one is that we also are a major publisher and as a publisher, beyond our att.et,net, we have yellowpages.com. pleaded to be even clearer. we added a link at the bottom of the page that says, advertising

choices. you click on that linke. up comes the ability to do two things. 1, opt out if you do not want to be part of any collection of data. it brings you right there very quickly. it also tells you what our advertising policies are separate from our privacy policies. if you really want to understand that, we try to do it very clearly. in addition to that, we also worked with our friends at -- to create a profile manager. we're talking about a very different scale we ended up creating a customer preferences, allowing customers to find out what was being collected, how we were being -- however making interest based advertising and allowed manipulation of the interest categories depending upon what the customer felt they wanted.

in addition to that, we also took the icon idea and said let's see whether that makes a difference. let's take an icon. we picked one of the top three that have been tested. sadly, for us, it is not going asterisk man.e we have been testing its in the human factors context where we see people. word of their eyes go? are the understanding it? the diverted to help? we have been trying to be a living example of what the industry innovation any time there is one, we jumped in and say we will test it.

in addition to that, yellowpages.com is a popular local search engine. we have gone data in the last several weeks -- beta in the last several weeks. this is a recommended site that allows our customers to actually say, do you want to participate in the recommendations from your family and friends? if you are looking for a sushi restaurant in san princess, you want to send your question out to your group of friends -- san francisco, you want to send your question out to your group of friends. your local search is enhanced by your recommendations of people that you know. go on. if you go back for just one slide, at the bottom, a couple

of things that we did hear which adds to the discussion. it wanted to engage the customer in the actual privacy design of this. at the bottom, we do not say link to your privacy policy, we say here is how we're going to share information on this site. we make that very clear and identify it for what it is. the next. once you get to -- part of the feature of the products, when you are engaged in to -- when you go to the site, it is a feature of identifying who you are and who you are reflects how you want your privacy settings to be. as a part of the actual product, you have to identify at the outset, are you shy or are you outgoing? we use words that people understand, not some tricky

word. we explain what we mean by shai or outgoing by identifying what that means. y or outgoing. in addition, the final feature of this is that we actually say, shy is anonymous, but it may not be anonymous. if you are asking for the best sushi restaurant for madison, wisconsin, and you have for friends and you are anonymous but you are the only one living in madison, people may figure out who you are by the context of that. we make clear in this statement -- do not send sensitive information digging it is anonymous. it may not be. that is a balance. we hope people want to use the service, but by the way, anonymous does not really mean private.

we tried to build in all of these privacy features as an element. privacy by did -- privacy by design. working with our business, we did not go well and say, let's figure out whether this works. it is a challenge for us because the industry is a little two-sided on that point. in this context, we deliberately tried to go forward and create the right kind of privacy settings from the outset. we will see if it works. thank you. >> jessica, would you like to rejoin us?

getting back to where i started, i think we see an extraordinary amount of adaptation in the privacy tool development space. last time, when danny and i first met, which are working on a platform for privacy preferences and whether we were giving people too much choice, too much regularity, etc. we were also working with bbb. i think it is fair to say that back then, the world was to dimensional and now we have lots of examples of much more sophisticated to privacy enhancing technology. what i would like to hear the panel discuss is how far does this get us? there are a number of issues.

in mentioned the importance of scale. scale is important for one company, but it is also important for the entire ecosystem. one of the things that we mentioned -- lee mentioned, bbb is going to go out and probe sites that have not signed up for this process. just like any other example, somebody could be sitting out there, just as any business who does not have a privacy policy, and they get a note from the bbb. does that get us there in terms of scale? the other interesting thing is that we see a lot of experimentation in the different companies approaches, which is great, does that lead to confusion on the part of the consumer? when do we get toward something that is more standardized?

is it important to press standardization? the big question is, we see that this is effective for u.s. consumers in the u.s. context. people noted that overseas, the sophistication around to development, adoption, self regulation, is not there. where does this give us in terms of the global dialogue? these are some of the pressing questions. just a comedy want to take some of those? -- jessica, do you want to take some of those? >> we need a microphone for the tape. >> i will start with the middle question and see if i meander toward some of the others. i think it really spoke to me to say, is this going to be

confusing for consumers? just to start off, everything everyone describe to today is exactly what the ftc called for when it asked for self regulation. it asked for greater transparency in behavioral advertising. that is why i am referring to. we asked for certain notices to be more contextual outside the privacy policy said that consumers would more likely see it. we're seeing a lot of activity in development that we're very encouraged by. in the short run, it is going to be very, very confusing for consumers. as these models are developed, they are different from each other. maybe people are using different icons. jules probably wants everybody to use his icons. there are three different -- we

have got the province -- preference monitors. they are similar, but they are not the same. on top of that, consumers will be needing to do this on a site by site basis. in the short run, there'll be a massive amount of confusion, but we are learning and we're experimenting. many of these companies and at&t are learning to what consumers are responding well to and what they are not. i think this is a healthy process, but it is not like this is what we wanted. it is here. consumers are now going to understand everything. it is a process. there are a lot of other things that need to shake out before we see whether it -- how successful these efforts are. will there be accountability? that is what lee is here to make sure of.

if you have a self regulatory scheme and there is no enforcement or accountability, it is not very meaningful. the ftc has been working to broadcast that message. it we have brought cases in this area against a program called control scant that was slapping seals on companies. these companies were getting seals. it is pretty important for us to call that out. enforceability is another thing we will need to look for. as mike said, whether companies actually use it and implement it, principals are one thing, but implementation is another. there is this question of if consumers -- are the choices going to be side-by-side and are consumers going to be confused by that? they go, the opt out of

something, and then the next time they go to a similar site, they think that maybe they have opted out. why am i now still getting advertisements? there are a lot of things to be worked out. a lot of progress and growth that needs to be made before we see how this works. >> let me jump in and say, day- by-day, the only way there are self regulatory advances, it is not like there is nothing that happens in all the sudden there is something new. what happens this, companies individually start to leave. they say, what can i do better? if you wait until there is consensus, it perhaps never happens. everyone is waiting to see who plunges into the water first. one of the reasons why today --

we talk about things that someone is doing some more that go we're little bit further. those are the things that people see. the advocates liked it. it is feasible, i could do this, too. the new consensus and you have progress bridge -- you have progress. their baby steps toward more transparency and control. a decade ago, when a lot of the started focusing on this, retention policies? what do you mean? i was not going to throw out data that might have some value. search data, some people have read some companies have three- six month policies.

you have dozens and dozens of companies having better policies. yet companies having -- you have ip address is recognizing that it is a bit more sensitive. you saw some of the behavioral notices. most of these things point to the nai site. at one place, and you will opt out of 40, 50, 60 ad networks. you actually do not need to do so. users actually understand this process, i think it is still a big challenge. will we did our consumer testing, and we ask users in focus groups, do know what this was? one remark that i remember well. it is when you're watching a movie and all this and you get really hungry for popcorn and

that is because you flash -- a flash something. no, no. it is hard to explain something to somebody and give them control. steps like shifting from privacy policy. there have been some improvements in the opt out program. there are plugged in that you can download that will keep those policies. what about the mobile world? they are not off the hook, are they? you saw the first mobile program launched last week.

we will let you have the opt out. the iphone os4 noted that when your location is being shared, you'll get a symbol that someone is getting your location. . . let's make sure that off works, but we can argue it is ok to have it default on. we know what medical stuff is,

but can target the best on the fact that you searched for the word cancer or selling sexual or something embarrassing? many of the companies have internal policies, but we are all over the map. you have every kind of practice going on in the world. again, it is hard to do it perfectly, but not hard to say that these the the terms that we're too embarrassed to tell you as a consumer that this is the kind of thing we're keeping about you detailer you based on what you look deputies ability challenge of some of the privacy controls, we kind of the plane. but there are a lot of places where it is just programming the vcr, which for not of the events of things, that would still be be linking zero. and the consumers would be blinking 0 when it comes to the controls. there are icons now, and we need to turn them with some privacy controls to meet those features so people do not feel like

they're closing their teeth. this is how i use this thing because it is a key part of why i am here. >> i have a comment. just as they did two years ago when the ftc present to their original draft of the prevacid principles for oba, they put their finger on the right issues. and that happened again today. i appreciate it. but there are areas where we want innovation, and there are areas where i think we was standardization. those sometimes are mutually exclusive. so you do not want to people going out and freelancing because from a consumer experience, it needs to be a common experience and easily understood so we can educate as an industry and as the government, to go back and educate the public at large. this is an icon that means something. it will become ubiquitous. you need to understand what this

means. over time, people will understand because it is easy to discover. we put out an icon, not a series of icons. we did put three links with the verbiage that goes along with that. that is sort of set as well. and that, for different reasons, you all wanted one and some other companies wanted another. the point is, we can standardize, which gets us to scope implementation. we need wide scope soever but can easily adopt their standardization. but on the back end, that is where we want the innovation. that is with the companies are doing. >> i want to interject. , to give the audience a chance to answer one or two questions. >> i think the whole panel is demonstrating the wisdom of the approach that the ftc took, actually twice. if you think what would happen if the ftc had come up with

regulations for legislation in 2000 when they first looked at online behavioral advertising -- i mean, we are a world away from that. from that approach? the whole discussion that you heard today about this wonderful preference manager technologies, you know, that relief was not on the table or focused on during the first ftc said of recommendations and self regulatory guidelines, which was an innovation itself. the ftc keyboard saying here is what we want to see, and we want you to go out. it was a real innovation. people have always responded to it. the last thing is to emphasize that we need consistency. i do not think it has to be complete uniformity on the wording. the ftc has regulations, and

they say you have to put up the morning so consumers do not lose interest. i do not think it just three words are enough. >> can i say one word? education. we should emphasize that. all of this depends on educated consumers so they can recognize this icon. >> see if there's any questions in the audience. >> i just wanted to say that innovation is often a little bit messy. one thing's for us to the marketplace, companies are thinking of different ways to do things. and we all have different technologies. the way in which we surface transparency might be a little bit different. we learned from that. there's a lot of excitement and energy in this. we have seen some standardization. we may see more. they're very products that hit

the marketplace fully formed and perfect. even the iphone apparently is going to come up with a new model soon, right? the goal is to -- >> it is all perfect. >> the goal is to continually improve over time. and you are seeing competition around this, too. that is super healthy. >> [inaudible] >> your microphone is not on. >> the only thing is not perfect is we're five minutes over time. so we'll have time for two very quick questions. >> i am sure the questions will be quick. i hope the answers will be quick, too. >> mine will not be because it is in three parts. >> well. >> first, i wonder whether along with an icon, did anyone think of a tone as a way of identifying the privacy message? second, what about over collection? why do sites need to know my hair color, eye color, or other

data to register me? and isn't that a continuing problem? it there it goes to the international body. cannot -- cannot leave this alone? i welcome the idea of an international body of privacy officials, but is that the way to get the u.s. regime to get incorporated with the global regime? >> well, the ever collection issue, i would love to address. the ftc has been harping on that a long time, particularly in connection with this security, and it has been a fundamental privacy principal internationally for many years. they do not collect what you do not need. in fact, if you do not collect it, it is not at risk. if you do not need it, you really do not want it. >> we collect a good deal of data. we use it for a lot of different purposes across the site. there's one particular use which

is behavioral advertising. there are a lot of other uses that relate to somebody operating our site. i think this is where retention is important to talk about. it is the time you retain data in an identifiable form. i cannot stress enough when we talk about choices and opt out, we're really talking about use- based remarks and not collection-based frameworks. it gets at the issue and having perhaps too much information. >> on the international peace, it is enormous. transparency is only a piece of that. the challenge of this global economy and data flowing in coming up with some common understandings is extremely important. >> the goal is to say stop treating this as a human right

and part of the constitution because we're " americans with innovation. [laughter] but if it is a matter of, look, here's the status quo. this is how people state that is being captured. here is an improvement, any documents in others world peace, but here is how we will have less and take an important step for the users. many regulators will grudgingly, in practice, accept that. they have given primacy suspect by the government in germany to a number of advertisers. they have ip addresses and rules's assistive information. the like to announce it. but the reality is, de facto improvements presented with sophistication and remembering is about people. they want us to remember is this about humanity and rights. >> on the international front, and a couple of months, we have

explored the self-regulatory program to the eu. and we will have this same discussion with their own privacy principles as they roll up their suit. >> real quick. secondary use, and may not care about the use of my information for behavioral advertising, but i do not want it used for anything else. does your system allow for control over that? >> so when you go to yahoo!, we're collecting the information for advertising. it is one of the things we do it in one of many different uses for data we're collecting on the site. we have an integrated number of web sites that offer very different services. so we are among choice in this one instance. there are a lot of other things we do with the data that is relevant to the experience of the users. when we think about secondary uses, all of our uses we tend to think of as primary residence secondary, because it has to do very much with being able to operate the site and give you

the experience you were there for. >> i would like to thank the panel and give a closing thought in request for purposes of our noi. a think the dialogue here as well as other comments during the panel's demonstrates that actually in the u.s., we have developed an innovative way of doing policy-making, sort of a polish and pull between society and the government on one hand, and industry on the other. -- sort of a push and pull between society and the government. there is a discussion about the legislation now. but the push and pull in between has yielded change, and i think the question for us is, is that a workable model? is a need to be supplemented by something federalese? does it need to be supplemented by something federally or domestically?

can this approach actually be sold internationally and work internationally? those are the types of questions we would like you to address as you follow up with us. please thank our panelists. [applause] >> could i ask the final panel to come up on stage? >> and we leave this format the commerce department on the

internet and consumer privacy, and we go to the outcome of the british elections, still up in the error in terms of who's going to be in control of the majority. no one party has a 326 seats needed for full majority. as of 1:00 today, conservatives had won 306 seats in the house of commons. labor, at two hundred 58. and democrat -- liberal democrats, 57 two we next go to this morning's statement from the three party leaders. first, a liberal democrat leader, nick clegg, who says conservatives should be given the chance to form a government. after that, according brown expresses a willingness to work with either party to form a coalition. the conservative leader david cameron says he will make a "comprehensive offer to form a collaborative government for liberal democrats." now those statements from british party leaders.

>> thank you for coming in such small numbers to county street this morning. last night was a disappointment for liberal democrats, even though more people voted for us than ever before, even though we had a higher proportion of the votes than ever before. it is of course a source of great regret to me that we have lost some really valued friends and colleagues, and we have returned with fewer mp's than we thought. many people during the election campaign were excited to about the prospect of doing something different, but it seems that when they came to a vote, many of them, in the end, decided to stick with what they knew best.

and at a time of great economic uncertainty, i totally understand those feelings. but that is not going to stop me from redoubling my efforts and our efforts to show that real change is the best reassurance that things can get better for people and their families, that it should not be something which unsettles people. now we are in a very fluid political situation with no party enjoying an absolute majority. as i have said before, it seems to me that in a situation like this, it is vital that all political parties and political leaders act in the national interest and not of narrow the political advantage. i have also said that whichever party gets the most votes and the most seats if not an absolute majority has the first right to seek to govern, either on its own or by reaching out to

other parties. and i stick to that view. it seems this morning that it is the conservative party that has more votes and more seats, though not an absolute majority. that is why i think it is now, for the conservative party, to prove that it is capable of seeking to govern in the national interest. at the same time, this election campaign has made it abundantly clear that our electoral system is broken. if it simply does not reflect the hopes and aspirations of the british people. so i repeat again at my assurance that whatever happens in the coming hours and days and weeks, i will continue to argue not only for the greater fairness in british society, not only the greater responsibility in economic policy-making, but also for the extensive real

reforms that we need to fix our broken political system. thank you very much. [applause] >> with the outcome of the general election, we find ourselves in a position un known to this generation of political leaders. with no single party able to have a majority and therefore have a majority government. i have never felt that i should give you and through you the country my assessment of where we are. i do so as prime minister with a constitutional duty to seek to resolve the situation for the good of the country, not as a leader of the labor party less than a day after the election. what we have seen are no ordinary election results. people have been talking for some time, inside and outside government, about the possibility of a hung parliament. that possibility as now become very real and pressing.

the question from the political parties now is whether a parliamentary majority can be established. it seems to reflect what you, the british people, have just told us. first, is well understood that we face immediate economic challenges that must be met. the meeting of the euro group is being held tonight to discuss greece and other issues. in vance of this, the g-7 advanced -- finance ministers, including america and britain, are meeting by conference call to discuss the deteriorating situation in the bureau area. allison darling is participating for the u.k. our economic priorities for britain are to support economic recovery this year, and as the recovery stabilizes, to move swiftly to implement our deficit reduction plan. on the critical question on the formation of a government which can command a parliamentary

majority, i have of course seen the statements of other party leaders. i understand and completely respect the position of mr. clegg in stating that he wishes first to make contact with the leader of the conservative party. as you know, we already have faced mechanisms and facilities that will give the political parties in the civil service support that they may need. mr. cameron and mr. clegg should clearly be entitled to say as much time as they feel necessary. but my part, i should make clear that i would be willing to see any of the party leaders. clearly should the discussions between mr. cameron and mr. clegg come to nothing, then i would of course be prepared to discuss with mr. clegg the areas where there may be some measure of agreement between our two parties. there are two areas in particular with such discussions to be likely to focus. the first is the plan to ensure

continuing economic stability, whether it is steps -- where there is substantial common ground. and far-reaching political reforms including changes to the voting system. both of us have made clear our commitment to design our manifestos, and the actors have sent a strong message which must be heard. my view is clear. there needs to be a major legislation on this to begin to restore the public trust in politics and to improve parliament standing and reputation. a fair voting system is essential, and i believe that you, the british people, should be able to decide in a referendum whether the system should be. what all of us need to be mindful of is the imperative for strong and stable government and for that to be formed. with the authority to tackle the challenges ahead and one which can command support to

parliament. it is with this in mind that all of us should be facing the times ahead. i understand, as i know my fellow party leaders do, that people do not like the uncertainty or want it to be prolonged. we live, however, in a parliamentary democracy. the outcome has been delivered by the electorate. it is our responsibility now to make it work for the national good. i am sure that you will understand that this is all that i have to say at this stage today. thank you all very much. >> david caprine now, seated by members of his shadow cabinet. >> -- to david cameron now. >> the conservative party gain more seats than in the last 80 years. i am incredibly proud of the

strong result we achieved but also the strong and positive campaign we fought. we campaigned for hope, and people responded to that, giving us 2 million more votes than labor. we campaigned for change, not more of the same, and people responded to that, giving as a higher share of the vote than labor is cheap at the last election when they won the majority. there are many great new conservative members of parliament who will be coming to the house of commons, and i am very proud this will be a new, modern conservative party in parliament. i know it will make a huge difference to our politics. to all those conservative party supporters, members, and activists who fought so hard, not just in the last weeks, but in the last few years. if i want to say huge thank you. in to remind you how proud you will be of the results, getting

more season even market doubt -- and even margaret thatcher received. the most in any general election since 1931 and a share of the vote not far off what was gotten in 1983. however much we take an enormous advance, we have to accept that we fell short of an overall majority. as i said last night, britain needs strong, stable, decisive government, and it is in the national interest that we get that on a secure basis. we are at war in afghanistan with our troops putting their lives at risk for us every day. we're facing financial and economic situation of great seriousness as a result of our dangerous debts and our deficit. we need a government that reassures the international policies and we need policies

that will bring economic recovery. we needed a government to understand the great changes needed to restore faith in our political system. britain voted for change yesterday, but it also voted for a new politics. it did not vote for party bickering, grants did it, and. scoring. our country's problems are too serious. they are too urgent for that. so we must all rise to this occasion. we must show leadership. we must sort things out as quickly as possible for the good of the country. nick clegg has said that because the conservative party won the most votes and have the most seats in the election, which have the chance to a form a government, and i thank him for that. so we will now begin talks with other parties to see how that can be done. one option would be to give other parties reassurances about seven policy areas and in seek their agreement to allow minority conservative government

to continue in office without the country constantly facing the threat of its government falling. this is what is known as the confidence and supply arrangement. it has been done before, and yes, we can try to do it again. but i am prepared to consider the alternative options. it may be possible to have stronger, more stable, more collaborative government than that. there is a case for going further in an arrangement which gives a minority conservative government in office. i want to make a big, open, uncovered tens of offer to the liberal democrats. i want us to work together in tackling our country's big and urgent problems, the debt crisis, our deep social problems, and our broken political system. let me explain my thinking. first, it is right and reasonable to knowledge that their policy disagreements between us. many of which were highlighted

in this tv debates. to fellow conservatives who fought in campaigned in worked so hard to achieve the massive advance made in this campaign, and want to make it clear that i do not believe any government should give more powers to the european union. i do not believe that any government can be weak or soft on the issue of immigration, which needs to be controlled properly. and that the country's defenses must be kept strong. i also believe that on the basis of the election result we achieved, it is reasonable to expect that the bulk of the policies and our manifesto should be implemented. but across our two manifestoes, there are many areas of common ground. and there are areas i believe that we in the conservative party can give that. both in the national interest and in the interest of forging an open and trusting partnership. we share a strong desire to make

opportunity more equal in this country, and i recognize the high priority liberal democrats appear to the proposal in our schools. we agree with this idea. it is in our manifesto, too. i sure we can develop a common approach that recognizes the urgency that the liberal democrats attached to this proposal but of the liberal democrats signed a manifesto made the achievement of a low carbon economy, and we support the same. i am sure we can agree on a common plan to achieve it. liberal democrats and also the proposals to reform our taxes. we both agree that labor's jobs tax is a damaging tax on jobs, and we would seek to reverse it. it has always been an aspiration for the conservative party to reduce taxes, especially on those who aren't the least. we're happy to give this a much higher priority and to work

together to determine how it can be afforded. we share a common commitment to civil liberties and to getting rid immediately up labor's id card scheme. and our political system, we agree with the liberal democrats that reform is urgently needed to help restore trust, and that reform must include the electoral system. the liberal democrats and their ideas. we have our ideas. for example, that all seeds should be of equal size so the boats can have an equal value in eight nother system. her other parties have constructive proposals to put forward as well. i believe we will lead in all party committee of inquiry on political and electoral reform. so i think we have a strong basis for strong government. the negotiations are about to start and will involve compromise. that is what working together in the national interest needs. but no government will be in the

national interest unless it deals with the biggest threat to our national interest, and that is the deficit. we remain completely convinced the starting to deal with the deficit this year is essential. this is been more than confirmed by recent events in other european countries, recent instability in the markets, in recent conversations that we have had with both the treasury and the bank of england. the national interest is clear, the world is looking to britain for decisive action. the new government is crip the steps it and prevent the economic catastrophe that would result in putting off the urgent action that needs to be taken. so our big, open, and comprehensive offer to the liberal democrats involves helping them to implement key planks of their election manifesto, providing the country with economic as well as political stability. and finding further ways in which a liberal democrats are to

be involved in making this happen. the ongoing labor government has left this country with terrible problems. an economic and financial crisis, a deep social problems, a political system in which to many people have lost faith. the new government will face the worst inheritance of any incoming government for at least 60 years. that is exactly why it is so important to have strong, stable government that lasts, a strong comestible government which has the support of the public to take the difficult decisions that are needed if we're going to put this country back on the right track for a stronger future. there is one further point want to make. i believe it is not just important to have a strong and stable government. it is a part we get the strong and stable government quickly. so i hope we can reach an agreement quickly on the big, open, incumbents and offer that i have outlined today.

as i argued in this general election campaign, i think this is a great country, but we could be doing so much better. we do not have to settle for the debt, waste, and the taxes left to us by labor. we can put behind us the economic incompetence, social breakdown, political division, and the mistrust of 30 years of liberal misrule. of course i hope the conservative majority would be the outcome of this election and that we could have started today making the changes that i believe our country so badly needs. i know how much the conservative party itself, all my colleagues in parliament, all the loyal members and activists around the country wanted that, too, but i also know they wanted something more than that. they want the best of britain. the conservative party has always been a party that puts the national interest first. and the best thing, the national interest thing, the best thing

for britain now is a new government that works together in that national interest, and i hope with all my heart that is something we can achieve. that is all i have to say now. i hope you will understand. i will not be taking questions, but this urgent work must begin. thank you. >> we leave the british leader's speeches. you can find them in their entirety at c-span.org. next, president obama on the latest unemployment numbers released today. the littered the park -- the labor department report shows unemployment rising to 9.9% in april, even more jobs are created. officials said that is due to more people looking for work. from the white house, this is just under 10 minutes. >> on was is a daily basis,

we're brought to the statistics, forecasts, reports, and data related to the health of the economy. but from the first days of this administration, amidst the worst economic crisis since the great depression, i have said the truest measure of progress will be whether or not we're creating jobs. that is what matters in people's lives. it matters whether someone needs a job air can find one, whether people can provide for their families for the future and achieve some measure of economic security. everything we have done has been with this in mind. today i am have a to report that we received some very urging news. in april, the economy added 290,000, with the vast majority, approximately 230,000 coming from the private sector. this is the largest monthly increase in four years. we created 121,000 more jobs in february and march than previously estimated. which means we have now seen job growth for four months in a row.

these numbers are hardening when you consider where we were a year ago, with an economy in free fall. the height of the downturn around the time it took office, we were losing an average of 750,000 jobs a month. so this news comes on the heels of a report last week that their overall output of our economy, our gdp, is increasing. we now know that the economy has been growing for the better part of a year. that steady growth is starting to give businesses the confidence to expand and to hire new people. i should also note that the unemployment rate ticked up slightly from 9.7% to 9.9%. given the strength of these job numbers, this may seem contradictory, but this increase is largely a reflection of affected workers who had dropped out of the work force entirely are now seeing jobs again. -- are now seeking jobs again. they are encouraged by better prospects. and now want to emphasize, the

economic crisis we face has inflicted a lot of damage on families and businesses across our country, and it will take time to repair and rebuild. of course, with this recession, more than 8 million jobs were lost. so there are a lot of people out there who are still experiencing real hardship. we have to be mindful that today's jobs numbers, while welcome, it leaves us with a lot of work to do. it will take time to achieve this strong and sustained growth and necessary. and of course long before this recession hit, for a decade, middle-class families have been experiencing a sense of declining economic security. so yes, we have a ways to go. but we have also come a very long way. we can see that the difficult and at times unpopular steps that have been taken over the past year are making a difference. productivity is up. the hours people are working are up. both are signs the company may be hiring more workers in the months to come. we saw the largest increase in

manufacturing employment since 1998, and we can see the benefits of our recovery act in strong employment reports in construction and other sectors where we have made key investments in creating and saving jobs. of course there are limits to what we can do. the true engine of job growth in this country will always be the private sector. that is why we're very pleased to see the strong employment growth on the private sector side. what government can do is help preconditions for companies to hire again. it can build the infrastructure and offer incentives to allow small businesses to workers and to help entrepreneurs take a chance on an idea that will lead manufacturers to set up shop, not overseas but right here in united states of america. that is what we have been doing. ryan now series of tax incentives and hirings are taking effect. because of a bill signed into law a few weeks ago, businesses are now eligible for tax cuts for hiring unemployed workers.

companies are also able to write off investments in new equipment. it will spur additional investments in school renovation, clean energy projects, and worked construction. which will create jobs while lange a new foundation for lasting growth. in addition, as part of helping, four million small businesses got postcards and telling them that they are eligible for health care tax cut. it will provide welcome relief to small business owners into often have to choose between health care and hiring. so that has already come on line, but we still have more to do. my state of the union address, called for a $30 billion small- business lending fund, which would help increase credit to small companies hit hard by the fall of the financial crisis. obviously, small businesses are a major source of cooperation. this morning, we send draft

legislation to congress on this, which now includes a new state small business credit initiative. the state initiative, which was designed with the help of governors and members of the house and senate, would help expand money to small businesses and many factors and a time when budget shortfalls are making states cut back on of vitally important lending programs. in addition, the state and local governments face huge budget gaps. we're seeing layoffs of teachers, police officers, firefighters, and other essential public servants. it not only harms the economy but also the community and the economy as a whole. so we're working with congress to find ways to keep our teachers and classrooms, the police officers on the beat, and firefighters on call. a few months ago i also proposed giving people rebates to a british energy efficiencies of their home. this will not only save families money. it will create jobs and hard hit construction and manufacturing

sectors. things that windows and insulation are overwhelmingly made in the united states of america. i was gratified to see bipartisan vote to pass this proposal called home starts in the house of representatives yesterday. i am calling on the senate to act as well. we're also helping create jobs across america building wind turbines and solar panels. even as we take these steps to -- steps to increase hiring in the short and long run, we're also mindful of other economic factors that can emerge. so i want to speak to the unusual market activity that took place yesterday on wall street. the regulatory authorities are evaluating this closely. they have a concern for protecting investors and preventing this from happening again. they will make findings of the republic along with recommendations for appropriate action. i also spoke this morning with german chancellor merkel regarding economic and financial developments in europe. we agreed on the importance of a

strong policy response by the affected countries and a strong financial response from the international community. and made clear that the u.s. supports these efforts, and will continue to cooperate with european authorities in the imf during this critical time. so this week's jobs numbers comes as a relief to americans who found a job. it offers little comfort to those still lot of work. so to those who were other still looking, and give you my word that i am going to keep fighting every single day to create jobs and opportunities for people. everyone of my team standing alongside me here has the same sense of mission. we're not going to rest until we have put this difficult chapter behind us. i will not rest until you and millions of neighbors, these storms are able to find a job and reach a brighter day. thank you very much.

>> just before the president's remarks on airport jobs numbers, the bureau of labor statistics chief explained them to lawmakers on capitol hill. this congressional joint economic committee hearing is about an hour and five minutes.

>> today's report provides fresh evidence of the labor market is strengthening and that we're on the path to economic recovery. in april, we added 290,000 jobs, including 231,000 in the private sector. in the last two months, we have added over 520,000 jobs with 80% in the private sector. although the unemployment rate rose to 9.9%, the increase is due to reentrant sent to the labor force, a sign of increased optimism about job prospects. we have come a great distance in the past 15 months, since the lows of the great recession, but getting back the jobs lost in the past decade is going to take some time. by moving quickly and taking bold actions, the obama administration and congress slowed the decline and restored

the economy to growth in the second half of 2009. the recovery act, which president obama signed into law in february 2009, provided tax relief to 95% of american working families. it expanded credit to small businesses, extended unemployment benefits, and created jobs while investing in clean energy technologies, infrastructure, and education. additional actions are to create jobs and help small businesses include the worker home ownership and business assistance act, which expanded the first-time home buyer tax credit and enhanced small business tax relief. the hire act which provides tax incentives to businesses that hire out of work americans. the house of representatives passed the summer jobs at the 2010, which supports an additional 300,000 summer jobs

for our young people. in addition to today's job numbers, we have seen more and more evidence that the actions stake -- actions taken are working. after four straight quarters of negative growth, the economy has now grown for three straight quarters. retail sales have increased for three straight months. cells of both existing and new homes increased in march, with sales of new single-family homes rising by almost 27%. while it is encouraging to see these signs of progress and the return of job growth, we will need strong growth to get all employed americans back to work. as we focus on getting our national economy going, families all over are grappling with their family economy. working mothers are key contributions to both. in fact, on monday, we will be releasing the report that looks at how working moms have fair during this great recession. for the overall work force,

unemployment remains unacceptably high levels, with more than 15 million americans out of work. almost half of the unemployed have been out of work for more than six months, almost one- third have been unemployed for over a year. african-american and hispanic workers face unemployment rates of 16.5% and 12.5% respectively. well above the overall unemployment rate of 9.9%. these jec has become a series of reports to better understand employment challenges among different demographic groups. in march, we released a report on long-term unemployment in the african-american community. earlier this week, with another report on unemployment among hispanic workers. later this spring, will be examining the challenges facing younger members of the labor force. though hiring has started to increase, that hiring is uneven. just two days ago, dr. alan

krueger, chief economist at the treasury department, testified before this committee that hiring among smaller companies remains weak. he testified that small businesses are generally the drivers of the new jobs during recoveries, but larger establishments have been the ones to expand hiring during this recession. he testified that access to credit for small businesses is a large part of the problem, keeping them from hiring. i know my republican colleagues share my commitment to doing everything we can to help small businesses did the loans they need so they can expand their operations and hire more people. we need to both identify new policies that unleashed the job- creating power of small businesses and support the sound proposals which have been put forward by the obama administration. i am particularly supportive of the 30 billion small-business

lending fund proposed by the administration because it targets the small and mid-sized community banks at the center of small business lending. well these banks represent 20% of all bank assets, they count for more than half of all small business loans. by transferring funds from tarp to treat this fund, we can get new loans out into the community, growing businesses and adding jobs. i also co-sponsored hr 4302, the small business committee accretion, and access to capital act, which would raise the cap on small business administration loans from $2 million to $5 million. raising the cap on loans can have a powerful positive affect on small businesses and is something we should move through congress as quickly as possible. well today's report on the april employment situation shows continued process -- progress, we need to watch the most

important thing, creating jobs, jobs, jobs. i look forward to hearing additional information about the april employment numbers from the bureau of labor statistics commissioner, dr. keith hall, but now i will recognize my colleague. >> thank you, madam chairman. i am joining you in welcoming dr. hall before the committee. today's report is mixed news for american workers and their families. on the one hand, payroll employment increased by if 224,000 jobs after excluding the 66,000 temporary census jobs. on the other hand, the unemployment rate rose to 9.9%. alarmingly, the number of long- term unemployed workers reached an all-time high of 6.7 million. the long-term unemployed as a percent of all unemployed workers also reached a record high of 45.9%.

if the painfully slow recovery is better than no recovery. but for the 15.3 million americans who are out of work and waiting for washington democrats to finally focus on jobs, this report is disheartening. at this slow pace, it would take much of the decade to return to normal employment levels. consumers and businesses are increasingly concerned that runaway government spending and the dangerous level of debt could lead america down a path in which greece has now found itself, for their handling america's recovery are small businesses reluctant to hire workers while congress is demanding new taxes, higher energy prices, and more expensive health care costs. washington is standing firmly in the way america's recovery. although real gdp grew at an annual rate of 3.2% in the first quarter of this year, nearly half of this growth was due to 1-off restocking of inventory. real final sales, which are a

better measure of the underlying trend in real gdp and the headline number, rose by only 1.6% in the first quarter of 2010. in line with this modest growth trend, the most recent blue chip consensus forecast by private economists predict real gdp would grow by 3.1% in 2010, while payroll employment will increase by an average of $117,000 per month this year. unfortunately, such slow growth in payroll employment means the unemployment rate will remain elevated. the blue chip consensus forecast will still be 9.4% in the first quarter -- and the fourth quarter of this year for the and a plenary. at the same. anchorage from comparative severe recessions, the reagan recovery of 1981 and 1982 was three times as strong in job creation and nearly twice as strong than real gdp growth is the current recovery. this is explained by vastly

different economic policies. economic policies that the federal government can either be a telling, accelerating real gdp growth, or a headwind, slowing it down. president reagan assumed pro- growth policies including reductions in tax rates and deregulation in open trade. combine with the disinflationary monetary policies under paul volcker, now greenspan, reagan made the foundation for two decades of prosperity. in contrast, president obama and congressional democrats up pursued largely into growth policies that have hindered this recovery. businesses are delaying critical hiring investment and expansion decisions based on constant mandates, premium increases and higher taxes from implementation of recently passed health care legislation and their uncertainty over cap and trade, card chekhov financial services reform, and other regulatory initiatives. private businesses -- instead of

providing encouragement, president obama and this congress have given entrepreneur is reason to worry. yesterday the u.s. stock market fell by more than 3.2%, and widespread fears that the greek debt crisis would spread to ireland, italy, portugal, and spain, which also have high levels of government deficit and debt. in to douse an uncommon central government budget deficits in these countries, known as the pigs, ranged from 4.1% 9 italy to 16.3% in greece. it ranges from 41% in spain to over 125% in greece. after using reckless spending, greece was forced to seek a bailout from the imf and european countries. now the greek government months -- must cut spending. the expectations among the greek public for salaries, pensions, and benefits have provoked strikes and riots. however, there's another country

his government budget deficit and debt could readily reached alarming levels found in europe. unfortunately for the american people, the country is the united states. according to our own cbo, the federal budget deficit will be over 10% of gdp this year. on the publicly held federal debt will be 63.2% at the end of fiscal year 2010. if the democrat in majority in congress adopts president obama's budget, the cbo thinks the deficit will excxceed the 4% several -- every fiscal year in the decade. president obama and congressional democrats pursuing reckless fiscal policies that are clearly unsustainable. unless these excessive spending deficits and debt a communication are quickly reversed, the u.s. may experience its own debt crisis.

in light of greece, no one will be around to bail us out. i look forward to your testimony. >> thank you very much, chairman. thank you for holding this important hearing. and like congressman brady, i am concerned about the debt. i am strong supporter of the bipartisan that commission. yes looking forward to the results as well as getting to work on this data. the same time, i think we have to be honest about what has happened here. when president obama took office for president bush, we were in major financial crisis. we had unemployment, if i remember, we lost it same number of jobs in the first month when president obama inherited this mess, the same number of people is living in vermont. this month, as far as i can see, we have this 9.9% unemployment,

which is troubling and not good news. this month, we have added 290,000 jobs, which is the largest gain since march 2006 and the fastest growth in ls four years. clearly, this is still not getting enough. in your time and time again from people in my state to do not have jobs even though the unemployment rate in minnesota 7.4%, significantly below the national average. i get letters all the time that semi be 7.4%, but in our household, it is 100%. grandmothers or working and trying to find an extra job tonight just to get christmas presents for their grandkids or a man that wrote to us and said that when he and his wife put their three daughters to that, they just sit at the kitchen table and put their heads in their hands saying, how are we going to make it tomorrow? these are real people experiencing these real problems. that is why having a safety net in place and having adequate

unemployment benefits will be important going forward. i am looking for, commissioner hall, to asking you about how we can have this increase in jobs at the fastest rate in the last four years but still have a rise in unemployment. i think i know the answer, but i am looking for to delving into that with you. as well as talking, as we have been, talking about the solutions. doing more with the small business issue. the money went to wall street. most of it has come back. but there is still so many problems on main street. it think as it did at past hearings, it is the wall street got a cold but mr. got pneumonia. we also must get the tax cuts, the helper for many of our important businesses, get that bill done by the end of may. i am hopeful that we get that done. and most importantly, what we're

debating every day and last night in the senate, is wall street reform. because if we do not stem the tide of some of these problems and we did not plug some of these loopholes, we're going to run into the same problem. i think yesterday's 900-point decline in the stock market was just one example. we can bounce back slightly. but it is an example of what can happen with volatility in the financial markets. i view that as part of the solution as well so we move ahead with this economy. by getting that wall street reform done. so i am looking forward to hearing from you, mick commissioner hall. i know that your featured in a profile recently. i thought you were sort of under the radar screen. was that the "washington post?" you do not even say yes because he is so under the radar screen. it seem like a nice profile of you and all the work you have done in the importance of gathering these statistics but as we look forward to asking you about them today. thank you very much. >> thank you very much.

mr. cummings is recognized. >> good morning. thank you for holding this hearing. how was just wondering, i saw you with that nice red and white tie, i guess it is your new status as a celebrity, huh? but i do think you for calling this hearing, madam chair. the last few hearings held by this committee have cast important light on some sobering truths about the labor market. first, we know the consequences of unemployment are severe. both for the individual and for their children. the unemployed are not only vulnerable to conditions like depression but are also at a higher risk for heart attacks and other stress related events. in fact, studies by a doctor show that the unemployed on the whole experience a shorter life span simply from being unemployed.

let me say that again. the unemployed, on the whole, experience a shorter life span. pervasive unemployment is a virus and epidemic. it requires the attention week would give to any public health concern. we also enunciated at recent hearings that for many unemployed workers, a substantial retraining is now necessary. this retraining often includes a return to the classroom, which in and of itself requires a significant financial commitment. we are asking workers to commit to serious change. as a result, we owe them a serious return on this new investment on education. therefore, we need to learn from and build on the success of programs we highlighted last night. atlanta, san antonio, boston,

baltimore. they successfully get unemployed into training and back out to work. however, the required investment in education do not end with worker retraining programs in higher education. the elementary and secondary education to admit -- infrastructure is in dire straits itself. .

but only would 275,000 potential job losses be a blow to children's education, but it would lead to 82,000 additional job losses from lost spending by the schools and the employees that were laid off. that is why we must reject that policy. under the guise of supposed deficit awareness, the money in this bill would not only help local economies grow again, allowing state and local governments to avoid tax increases, and keep sufficient police and fire personnel on the streets, it would provide on-

the-job training in the private sector, and keep teachers in america's classrooms. i am proud to lend my name to this bill as a cosponsor, not only because it protect our economy in the short-term, but because it makes investments in education that will help us thrive in the long-run. i look forward to hearing the commissioner's report. i yield back. >> thank you very much. i would now like to introduce commissioner hall. dr. keith hall is the commissioner of labor statistics for the u.s. department of labour. it is an independent, national, statistical agency that collects, processes, and analyzes official statistical data to the public, the united states congress, public, federal, local agencies, and he also served as chief economist for the white house counsel

economic advisers for two years under president bush. he was also chief economist for the u.s. department of commerce. dr. hall also spent two years of the u.s. international trade commission. we welcome you and we look forward to your testimony. thank you. >> madam chair, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the unemployment data released this morning. non-farm payroll employment rose by 290,000 in april. the unemployment rate edged up to 9.9% in the labor force increased sharply. job growth was fairly widespread with gains in manufacturing, professional services, health care, and leisure and hospitality. federal government employment increase with the addition of 66,000 short-term workers for the census 2010. non-farm employment has risen by 573,000 since december and

483,000 jobs were added in the private sector. manufacturing continue to add jobs in april. employment has increased by 100,000 since december. three industries have accounted for more than half of the factory job gains so far this year. elsewhere, mining employment continue to trend up. the industry has added 39,000 jobs since october. in construction, nonresidential building and heavy construction each added 9000 jobs in april. employment in professional and business services increased by 80,000 over the month. within the industry, job growth continued in temporary help services, where employment increased by three and a 30,000 since september. it also rose in services to buildings -- by 330,000 since september. it also rose in services to buildings.

it is in line with average growth over the prior 12 months. it also continued to grow in leisure and hospitality. the industry added 121,000 jobs since december, led by gains in food services. federal government employment rose in april, reflecting the hiring of the 66,000 workers for the census 27. employment in state and local governments was essentially unchanged. within transportation, employment fell in career and message and -- messenger services. turning now to measures on the survey of households -- the unemployment rate edged up to 9.9% in april and the number of unemployed persons was 15.3 million. those who re-entered the work force rose to 7 million. 6 million people had been jobless for 27 weeks or more. they made up 49.5% of all

unemployed persons, a record high. the labor force increased by 805,000 in april. the labor force participation rate rose by 0.3 percentage points to 65.2%, an increase of 0.6% since december. the employment to population ratio increased in april and rose by 0.6 percentage point since december. among the employed, there were 9.2 million individuals working part-time in april who prefer full-time work. that is about the same as march. in summary, employment rose by 21 90,000 in april, with gains in several major industries. by 291,000 in april, with gains in several major industries. we would be happy to answer questions. >> what are the brightest spots in this month's report?

another are a number of bright spots. -- >> there are a number of bright spots. the private sector gain was a large gain -- the biggest gain in about four years. the trend has been encouraging. every month this year, we have had job gains. we have had 573,000 jobs added so far this year. growth was also defused -- it was widespread. we have something called the diffusion industry, looking of the industries they gained and lost jobs. it looks a very detailed industries. nearly 2/3 gained jobs this month period to give you a perspective on that, in march, 2009, only about 15% of those industries gained jobs, so that is a significant improvement. manufacturing has been an encouraging sign. it has grown for four straight months.

manufacturing is around 25% of the job losses so far. nonresidential construction is showing signs of life. that had been a consistent job loser. for the last two months, we've had job growth. there have been about 260,000 jobs added there. hopefully, that is a turnaround in that industry. average weekly hours have risen. this is an indicator that the labor market is tightening in improving, both in terms of the title -- tightening and improving, both in terms of the manufacturing processes. the increase in the labor force was a sharp increase. it is probably a sign of increasing confidence in the labor market by workers. i will pull out one more data point, which i think is particularly important to look at.

the employment to population ratio. the basic logic here is, our jobs growing faster than the population is growing? it had only grown cigna valiantly -- it has been growing significantly all year. i consider that to be a good sign. >> are there signs that any additional sectors will start expanding in the near future? >> the fact that the job growth was widespread is a good sign. it means there is overall strength. that is in correcting that the job growth will -- that is encouraging that the job growth will hopefully continue to be broad. the health services at the job. that is an indicator of future job growth. the weekly hours worked continues to be a good sign. the weekly hours in construction went up a good amount. that is a good sign in an industry that has borne the brunt of the job loss.

>> are there for their -- are there more indicators that job gains will continue in the coming months? >> the encouraging thing here is that it is a trend. we have jobs -- we have had job growth for four months. the last two months, it has been solid growth. that is a good sign. >> i think the chart here -- we're not going to call a victory, but is certification -- it is certainly stepping in the right direction. when president bush took office, we lost jobs. in the last month that president obama took office -- when he took office in the last month of president bush's terms, we lost over 700,000 jobs. we have now put in place many programs that have moved us in the right direction. the chart is becoming a step chart, as we step up towards

more job growth. it is not success, but trending in the right direction, as you aptly said, commissioner hall. thank you so much for your testimony. i now recognize mr. brady. >> thank you, madam chairman. i would just caution with the all-time record high of long- term unemployment, no one in congress is raising an open to open " mission accomplished" banner just yet. there are 6000 -- hospitality, manufacturing, federal government, construction, mining employment, building services, temporary help workers, health care -- the federal government is hiring more than each of those sectors. how many federal government workers have been hired since

december? do you know? >> i think i can pull that appear quickly. -- pull that up quickly here. >> i would like to know the comparison on the government side. >> let's see. i have to do a really quick calculation on that. the last couple of months, we have added about 120,000 jobs. for the year so far, it has been 155,000 in the federal government. thank you. >> thank you very much. that, too, continues to outpace manufacturing, health care, and other sectors. at the initial unemployment claims have remained -- of the initial unemployment claims have remained stubbornly high -- the initial unemployment claims have

remained stubbornly high. should we not expect them to slow down? >> historically, the unemployment claims -- they are more volatile, but they will track the payroll jobs pretty well. >> why is the number stating so high, month after month? >> i am not sure it has been inconsistent with the payroll job loss we have had. the job loss has been significant up until a few months ago. even as the -- >> even as the job recovery is painfully slow, it is headed in the right direction. should not those who are entering -- filing those initial claims -- be decreasing? >> yes it should -- yes, it should. >> does this reflect layoffs of workers to a managed to hold on to their jobs and are now being laid off for the first time? or does it include people who have been laid off before, found

a job, and then were laid off again? >> i believe it is the latter, people who are being laid off again. they could have been laid off before. >> on the census bureau, they expect to hire how many workers? they have hired 100,000 and they expect to hire about 600,000? >> may be in excess of that. they may have as many as 900,000, even 1 million. >> that will boost the numbers for the next few months, and then decrease them later this summer. >> i believe that is right predictor temporary jobs. -- i believe that is right. they are temporary jobs. he presented findings at a hearing based on unofficial be zero as -- bos data.

i guess i am troubled by the thought that our main street, versus wall street, companies, are not hiring. they're not creating job openings. why is that? why are not small and medium businesses confident enough yet to hire? >> i do not know. i do not have a good theory for that. >> but that is your data that he based his findings on? >> that is correct. >> small and medium businesses are not hiring at this moment. >> that is correct. >> thank you, commissioner. >> thank you very much. thank you, commissioner paul producing but explain why we add nearly -- thank you, commissioner paul. commissioner hall.

>> it is the number of people who are unemployed but actively looking for work. we did big increase in the number of people actively looking for work. >> before, they were not even looking. they had just given up. is that how you see it? >> yes, that is correct. >> you have told me before the changes in temporary employment are a sign of good things to come. what do those numbers look like now? >> we grew another 26,000 jobs in the temporary health. they are somewhere over -- there are somewhere over 300,000 jobs added in that industry since december. >> what about the people who are under-employed? they would like to be working full-time, but they are not. i am always struck by that. they have part-time work, but they're not where they used to be or where they want to be. >> we have a large number of

people who are part-time for economic reasons -- 9.1 million people. >> how has that changed over time? can you measure if they want to work more, as opposed to doing it by choice? >> that one is hard for us to measure monthly. it is not a large sample. i can tell you that our broadest measure of labor under utilization -- u6 -- people who are actively looking or people who are under-employed by being part time or who are discouraged, that increased as well. it went up about 2/10% -- 0.2% as well. >> one thing i have heard for recent graduates -- i got a letter from a woman who is from st. paul, minnesota, a college honors graduates -- monza she

is stuck under a desk job and sinking under -- her mom told me she is stuck under a desk job and sinking under a pile of debt. what is happening to these young workers who marched recent college graduates? canyon -- who are recent college graduates? can you get that to me? >> we can get that to you. the numbers have not been encouraging. the young graduates have more share of the brunt of this. we can get you more precise numbers. >> as we look at policies and what we can do to work with small businesses -- i am a big fan of doing more with exports and those kinds of things, to being private partners with industry -- the recent graduate issue is one we have talked about. we talked about the difference between some with a college degree, and mr. gregg, high school degree. do you have those numbers? have they changed? we have always been struck by the great difference between the

unemployment rates with someone with a high school degree and someone with a college degree. >> those numbers are like they always are. >> can you go through them quickly so we're reminded of the shocking indifference? >> the unemployment rate for those with less than a high school diploma was 14.7%. for those with a bachelor degree, it is 4.9%. it is almost 10 percentage point difference in the unemployment rate between the two groups. >> that ratio -- i was wondering as manufacturing and other tax increase -- you have still not seen any change. it contains to be the case at an advanced degree or college degree is one path to jobs. >> i would agree. it is hard to track the impact for manufacturing.

>> how about the veteran employment numbers? soldiers that have returned in the last -- from the iraq and afghanistan wars? >> the goal for -- gulf war ii is 13.3% -- it is significantly higher. we have been -- >> we have been working on a bill for the spirit we want to provide more opportunities. it seems out -- on a bill for this. we want to provide more opportunities. it seems outrageous. what are you seeing across the country? you talk about the improvement in the diffusion rate, but how this has been a recession this time that is not just east coast or midwest. what are we seeing in regards to individual states? who is still a top or the bottom?

are there any trends by region? >> sure. the states with the highest unemployment rate continued to be states that have had the highest rates for most of this recession. michigan topsail list at 14.1%. -- michigan tops the list at 14.1%. nevada, south carolina, florida, the district of illinois -- the district of columbia, illinois -- they have double digit unemployment. there are others, as well. there is no real regional pattern there. it does seem like states that have been harder hit than other states -- it is hard to see such a simple regional pattern or a simple pattern of any kind. >> one last thing. i will have to do a floor speech. i had a tourism subcommittee. you said there has been some increase in travel and leisure.

>> yes. >> thank you. >> one more question and we will move on. >> the leisure and hospitality industry had a significant increase of 45,000 jobs. >> thank you, very good. >> mr. cummings. >> thank you very much. i want to drill down on something miss klobuchar said. sometimes as i am sitting here and watching the press, i can imagine them putting up a headline -- "the unemployment rate has gone up 0.2%." there was -- there were some people who came back into the system. is that right? >> that is correct. >> do you call those ree ntrants?

>> i talked about the increase in the labor force, which includes new and re-entrants. >> how many were there? >> about 800,000. >> that is a huge number. so, if we did not have these newtrants and entrants, you would have our rate that would be lower than 9.7%. -- you would have a rate that would be lower than 9% -- 9.7%, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> i was listening very carefully to my good friend, mr. brady, who was talking about the government jobs. but then i looked and saw that manufacturing added 44,000 -- private jobs? >> they are.

>> factory employment was up 101,000. with those beep private jobs? >> they are. >> construction. is that federal or private? 14,000 jobs is a lot of jobs. >> they are all private. >> nonresidential and other mining -- private? >> yes. >> let me ask you this. it is my understanding that the gdp about 60% to 70% is about people spending money. is that, to your knowledge, accurate? >> yes, that is correct. >> when i look at manufacturing, 44,000 jobs, factory employment 101,000 jobs, construction -- somebody must be buying something. is that lot -- is that a logical

conclusion. -- is that allow the inclusion -- is that a logical conclusion? >> yes. >> let's go back to the census jobs. how many of these jobs are census jobs? the ones that had -- how many did we increase this month? >> 66,000. >> the total jobs that were picked up? >> 290,000. >> approximately 1/3 -- about 1/4 of them were for the census? >> yes. >> basically you are talking about a lot of other types of jobs coming to play. so, when the headlines are written, you have to take all of those kinds of things into consideration, would you not? >> yes.

>> one thing that was very interesting is that my good friend, mr. brady, talked about this the other day, the fact that -- a lot of times, small businesses were not doing as much hiring as we would like to see them do. one thing that he talked about -- and it really makes these numbers even more interesting -- isn't a lot of small-business is not even able to get loans. -- is that all lot of small3 get loans. there are businesses who cannot even get lines of credit. they would not be able to do the contract. the connected the credit, so therefore they're not able to do contrast -- whom they cannot get the credit, so therefore they are not able to do the contracts. it is a very significant

factor, when credit is a problem, we do not agree? >> yes. -- would you not agree? >> yes. >> i agree with miss " which are -- miss klobuchar that we cannot conclude that everything is rosy and that you're still going in a positive direction. is it an accurate statement? >> it is. >> thank you. >> thank you. i would like to go back to a point that was raised by my colleagues. it was raised by the chief economist at treasury who said that the rebound for the hiring was very uneven between the size of companies, between a large and small. from the bls data that you have, of the hiring patterns between large and small and -- are the

hiring patterns different between large and small firms from the recession's you have seen? >> large firms experienced more jobs lost in the 2001 recession. they had job loss well into 2003. the last recession was centered in large firms. the 1990 recession, it was the reverse. there were more net job losses in the small firms, rather than larger firms. it does vary. this recession, police threw the beginning of the recession, the job loss was -=- at least through the beginning of the recession, the job loss was both in small and large firms. >> many people believe that small firms are unable to expand because of lack of capital. in your opinion, what are the reasons why small firms aren't

hiring? >> i do not think i know enough about it to offer an opinion about that. i can tell you that collective small businesses had trouble getting loans, but -- i can tell you that, if small businesses had trouble getting loans, that would be a concern. >> have you seen any change in the small and mid-sized firms in recent months? are they picking up some what now? >> the data that was discussed crow a little bit -- discussed does show a little bit of a pickup in large firms, but not small and mid-sized firms. >> with mother's day just around the corner, it seems like a good time to ask you about mothers -- working women. it seems like they were hit in hard sectors, suffering

significant job losses. in recent months, these sectors have begun to recover and add workers. are women gaining jobs in those male-dominated sectors? but not so much. they are underrepresented in those particular sectors. >> what has happened to employment in female-dominated sectors in recent months, such as education, local and federal states government work? >> the education sector did not experience the same amount of job loss, but the job growth has slowed in education. state and local garment have seen no job growth. >> what is the unemployment rate for working mothers? have working mothers -- how have they done in this great recession, compared with other women? >> the unemployment rate for working mothers is 8.3%. that is an increase from 3.7

percentage points during the recession. that is actually fairly comparable to women who are not mothers. their unemployment rate is about 8%. the more shocking number is probably the actual job loss. we have some issues with labor force participation. working mothers have lost about 6.1% of their jobs during this recession, compared to women who are not mothers who actually lost 0.1 percentage points -- essentially no job loss. >> is it different for working mothers who are sole breadwinners for their families? and i guess, actually, that is much higher. it is 13.6%. >> how have minority working mothers cared? >> that one has also been much higher. african american -- 13.4%.

hispanic working mothers, 11.8%. both higher. >> given the economic challenges facing families during this recession, have more mothers enter the workforce and searched for work. -- and searched for work? >> the answer is yes. labor force participation has gone down during the recession. it has actually gone up for women with children -- foremothers. >> how has the experience of working mothers compared to prior recessions? >> in prior recessions, working mothers have had a higher than average increase in their unemployment rate. in the 1990 recession, the unemployment rate increased by 1.6 percentage points, compared to 1.3 percentage boat " for women without children.

-- percentage point for a woman without children. this time, it is almost double that. >> my time has expired. mr. brady. >> thank you, madam chairman. normally, america bounces back quickly. it is not happening this time. we do not have a v-shaped recovery. it is a very gradual recovery. it is a third as low as that 1981 and 1982 recovery. i'm convinced it is partly because businesses do not have the confidence to make investments. there are anxious to get back on their feet. -- they are anxious to get back on their feet. i know we like to be our chests and proclaim our programs that have spurred the economy. when i run our programs passed a small businesses in southeast texas, they say the gimmicks to not work, the small inducements

-- i will not bring on workers until i see the customers and clients. retail is moving a little, but not much. it added 12,000 jobs last month. there are 15 million people unemployed. is just a bit to eat. -- it is just a blip on the screen. people are concerned about their own jobs and by the financial crisis here in america. with our budget, there are very concerned. every poll shows that americans are increasingly concerned that this runaway spending, the dangerous levels of debt, will hold back economic growth. i was looking at the numbers. greece was so in the news yesterday. the news continues to be -- you can see people gathered around the tv set ask -- tv set

watching what was going on. if you look at countries that are the most troubled and their deficits, the most troubled countries have deficits between 4.1%, the lowest is in italy, and over 16% in greece. america will be toward the high end of that at 10% annual debt for this year. if you look at the growth of the central government debt, again, the five p.i.i.g. countries -- they allow government range of 45% to 125%. we are already in the middle of that at 60%. the cbo says if we adopt a budget, we will be at 90% of our gdp by the end of this decade.

we will be toward that high-end of the troubled, financially- suspect countries in europe that are causing trading panic and riots in the street, which is not going to happen here, by the way. it is a real concern everywhere i go back home. average people are not just worried about their checkbook. there are worried about america's checkbook. in your household survey, seeing that retail, which is the best sign of what they're doing is again painfully slow on the uptick, do you measure consumer confidence? are there other indicators within your numbers that tell us what people are doing? it seems to me they are holding tight. they're worried about their jobs. we do not see that bounceback

that normally would after this kind of recession. >> our data is a step removed from actual consumer confidence. we're looking at employment levels. at for reactions to things. >> what do you see on the auto side? cash for clunkers accelerated some spending and it has now gone back to a more normal aspect. what do you say on that side, for example? >> in motor vehicle production, we have modest growth of about 4000 jobs. in the automobile dealers retailing, we added about 2000 jobs for the month. >> pretty flat. >> it has not been strong, but modest. >> are there any other retail indicators? >> just the retail trade is the most directly connected to something like consumer spending.

>> in past recoveries and recessions, what have you seen in retail? what types of growth month-over- month would we be expecting to see? >> i do not know with respect to employment. i do not know what that is going to look like. i can tell you a little bit about what i know about other data. consumer spending and gdp over the long-run will sort of trapped together. in the short term, they do not necessarily do that. gdp does rely very much on consumer spending. >> on 2/3 of it. i'm out of time. i do apologize. will that change over time? will we be less consumer- dependent when we reach a full recovery? >> that is an interesting question about this recession. consumer spending was not always that large a percentage of gdp. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. cummings.

>> thank you very much, madam chair. mr. hall -- we have the summer months coming up. we have young people graduating. -- graduating from college and high school. tell me, what is the unemployment rate for our teens -- the teen unemployment rate? i would like to know what it is for african-americans, whites, and hispanics. ok. >> the unemployment rate for teenagers is very high -- 25%. >> do you have a breakdown for african-americans, whites, and hispanics? would you have that?

and i do not for teenagers. i have those groups overall. we can get to the teenager ones. do you want me to tell you the unemployment rate for african- americans? 16.5%. >> is that pretty much what it was last time? >> it is unchanged over the last month. four respects, it is 12.5%, also little changed. -- for hispanics, it is 12.5%, also little changed. >> for african-american teenagers, the rate was 37.3%. that is a little lower than it has been in recent months. that is a small group. it really jumps around from month to month. the white rate is 23.5% from a fairly stable in the recent months. is 23 -- the white rate is

23.5%, fairly stable in the recent months. >> i take it that is pretty high to what he might consider a pretty -- what you might consider pretty stable economic situation. >> that is correct. >> i want to go back to the reentrants and new folks. that will temper any dent we can make in the unemployment rate. people who stop looking for work will rejoin the labor force when they see an economy that appears to be improving. one state rejoin the labor force and until they -- once they rejoin the labor force, and until they find jobs, they're still labeled as unemployed? how'd we know that are looking?

>> they are counted as unemployed when they re-enter and start looking. >> how do you know they are looking? >> we do a telephone survey of households and ask people, essentially. >> what kind of increase did we expect -- should we expect for the people who are rejoining? as i see it, this is kind of a tough situation. as the economy gets better, i would imagine people look out there and say, and have been unemployed for a while. i am now want to get back out there. i think i have a chance of finding a job. the reentrants continue to increase. i am not even counting the new people, like you spoke about those of college and high school.

you have a steady increase if the economy gets better. it is a reasonable assumption? >> you need in the unemployment rate? >> in other words, if you have more people to deal with because more people are looking. >> it is not uncommon in the early stages of recovery to add jobs and have the unemployment rate go up, because people are re-entering the labor force, as you say. >> can you -- can you anticipate what might happen, other than what you adjust said? >> right. bamut is it easier for you to calculate how many people have left the labor force in this recession? can you estimate how many you expect to return? daniel looked at it from that perspective? does the historic -- can you look at it from that perspective? does the historic data suggest

anything? >> it is one of the reasons why i pointed out the employment to population ratio. that kind of cuts through whether people are looking or not. it is how many people are employed versus how many people lived in the country. it is a nice way of cutting through all of that. we have had a significant decrease in the employment to population ratio. it has dropped 3.9 percentage points -- pretty significant. this year, so far, it has actually increased 0.6 percentage points. it is a very good sign. >> thank you very much. this is good news today. this is the second consecutive month of positive employment gain. after weathering the harsh storms of 2000 -- 2009 and 2008, it is good to see some rays of sunshine.

this is not success, but as the chart shows, we're trending and moving in the the right direction. it is not success, but we're making progress. we in congress will continue working on policies that will help to create jobs, so that we can continue this progress. we thank you very much, commissioner, for your testimony today. this meeting is adjourned. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

" --his weekend's "booktv she spent 15 months in prison for delivering cash for international drug ring. her book is called "orange is the new black." sunday, new books from the first ladies of the past. rosalynn carter looks at health issues. laura bush talks about her new memoir. find the entire schedule at booktv.org. >> vice president joe biden address members of the european parliament on thursday. he called on them to work to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and to work on

a program that allows the u.s. to act as bank data in europe. his remarks are 35 minutes. -- to access bank did that in europe. -- bank data in europe. >> the vice-president of the united states of america. [applause] symphonyen's 9th playing]

[applause]

>> dear vice president, excellencies, dear colleagues, dear friends, it is a great privilege for me to welcome mr. joseph biden, the 47th vice- president of the united states. [applause] vice president biden has been at key figure in american politics -- a key figure in american politics and a friend to colleagues in this chamber for many years. he was first elected to the u.s. senate in 1972. he served as one of the youngest senator is in his country's history. he was reelected six times

before becoming vice president of united states in november, 2008. a former chairman of the senate foreign relations committee and the senate judiciary committee, he is known to speak his mind. he defends causes which are far from popular at the time. he leads opinion, he does not follow opinion. so that is the reason for your speech today, mr. vice president, to the european parliament is so important and so crucial for all of us. let me thank you once again for your very warm invitation and you're very constructive and fruitful discussions last week in washington. dear colleagues, in today's

world, europe and america can and should work together in a partnership for global stability and enlightened values. visit toident biden's the european union today demonstrates this commitment. we should attack this as equal partners -- the united states and european union. we must find lasting solutions to the many challenges we face -- climate change, energy security, the current crisis. it is still hitting all of us to terrorist are defending -- terrorists -- is still hitting all of us. terrorists, free trade, so many other things.

president ronald reagan addressed this parliament on the 8th of may, 1985. this was the last, and so far the only time, that a u.s. president has spoken to the democratically-elected colleagues here. your presence is a symbol of the renewal of that dialogue at the highest levels between our two countries. cities in europe, we have a new treaty. it is so important for the european union, giving us in the european parliament, new possibilities to act. it is very important. in america, after one year after president obama's election, there is new hope for the world.

the timing of your address, mr. vice president, could not be better. mr. vice president, it is a great pleasure to welcome you here this afternoon to europe's parliament. the floor is yours. >> thank you. [applause] >> mr. president, thank you for that welcome. it was a delight to have you in washington and at the white house. it is a great honor and privilege to be able to address such an esteemed body. i served in a parliament that only had 435 members total. this is an even greater honor.

when president reagan -- i remember his speech here in 1985. to quote an irish poet, sepaking of -- speaking of ireland, he hanged"all's changed. c utterly. a terrible beauty has been born." much has changed since 1985 and the terrible beauty has been born -- born. as you already know, not only am i pleased to be back here in brussels for the second time as vice president, some american politicians and journalists prefer to washington, d.c., as the capital of the free world.

it seems to me that, in this great city, which boasts 1000 years of history, and which serves as the capital of belgium, the home of the european union and the headquarters for nato, this city had that -- has its own legitimate claim to that title. as a lawmaker for more than 36 years in our parliament, i feel particularly honored to address the european parliament. president obama and i were the first running mates in the last 50 years in america to make it to the white house from our legislative bodies. so we both come to our executive jobs with a deep appreciation for the work you do here in the fashion of european democracy. together, with my former colleagues in the united states congress, you and i represent more than 800 million people.

stop and think about that momentarily. two elected bodies that shade the loss or almost 1/8 of the planet's population -- shape the laws for almost 1/8 of the plant population. you have taken on a broader responsibility that comes with that increased influence. we welcome that. we the united states need strong allies and alliances. that will help us tackle the problems of the 21st century. many of those of the same, and many are different. let me say this plainly. the obama and by an administration -- and biden administration has no doubt about for the need for and supports a vibrant european union. we believe it is absolutely

essential to american prosperity and long-term security. have no doubt about that. when i chaired the united states senate foreign relations committee for those years, i had the opportunity to meet many european lawmakers from the national and legislative bodies, including some view in this room today. -- some of you in this room today. i appreciate what a confidential -- consequential step it has been to build only multi- national parliament in the world, elected by suffrage. so much has changed. i am pleased that through this dialogue, you are building a strong relationship with the united states congress. i hope that the office you opened in washington last month is going to enhance those ties. 65 years ago this week, less

than 200 kilometers south of here, nazi leaders signed an unconditional surrender that brought an end to the second world war in europe. the next day, celebrations erupted in times square and piccadilly circus. cheering crowds danced along the streets and the town squares throughout the allied world. here in brussels, a bank's giving service -- a thanksgiving service, where church source said multiple national anthems -- church services sang multiple national anthems. this continent lay in ruins, ravaged by price -- ravaged twice in 30 years. at that moment, a peaceful, united europe, european parliament -- it must have seemed like a fantasy to anyone alive. and yet, through the will of

your fellow citizens and whomsmaen, like the man for this great hall is named, and all of the visions that gave birth to parliament, here we are, assembled in this hall. here you are. what began as a simple pact among half a dozen nations to create a common market for coal and steel grew into an economic and political power house, a community dedicated to free thought, free movement, and free enterprise, and europe that one historian has called "not so much a place, but an idea." i am here to reaffirm that president obama's and i believe in this idea -- obama and i believe in this idea and in

the world that it does already helped bring about. you have one from a unified voice. bolster the cultural and political values that my country shares with all of you. europe that is whole, a europe that is free, and a europe that is at peace. [applause] . it to support this great endeavor. the past 65 years have shown that when americans and europeans devote their energies to common purposes, there are

almost no things we are unable to accomplish. together, through the marshall plan, we rebuild europe and made perhaps the greatest investment in human history. we built the world's most enduring security alliance, nato, and state political force that ties america and europe together and brought us even closer. together, we established the greatest commercial relationship in the world's history, comprising 40% of global trade and helping in an era of social prosperity. together, we provide hope and relief to those suffering q but terry catastrophes in more places than i can mention -- suffering catastrophes in more places that i can mention. to those skeptics, who in spite of these accomplishments, continue to question the state of transatlantic relationships or might countries' attitudes

toward a united europe, my answer is this -- even if the u.s. and the nation's all of you represent were not united by shared values and common heritage of many millions of our citizens, myself included, our global interests alone would inexorably bind us together and. the relationship between my country and europe is as strong as -- as strong and as important as all of us as it has ever been. this century has unleashed new challenges, no less dangerous than those before. together, we are taking them on one by one. there are difficult. there will be disagreement but we are taking them on jointly. climate change, one of the greatest threats our planet faces. the u.s. and europe are working to ensure that all countries, especially the major economies,

are contributing to a global solution. we all look to and did take a major step forward in copenhagen. we now have to carry out those emission cuts, the financing and the transparency called for in that accord. we must help the most vulnerable nations from the arctic north, the pacific islands, that are the harbingers of this looming crisis. across the troubled line state -- landscape of afghanistan and pakistan, which are working to disrupt al qaeda and taliban fighters and to train an afghan army and police force so their government can protect its own people and not be a threat to its neighbors. in order to build the governing capacity of afghanistan, the united states and european union are deploying significant resources.

sustaining these missions has not always been popular but you know, as i do, it is required. as leaders, which have an obligation to make the case to our populations that this is necessary for our collective security. believe me, as a politician who has stood for office for 38 years, i understand, it is not easy. i assure you, it is no more popular in my country then it is in any of yours. it is also what the u.s. and europe are standing side by side, to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. a development that would in danger citizens and neighbors, including some of our closest allies. together, we embark on an unprecedented path of engagement with the iranian leaders. [applause]

>> despite what some skeptics thought, the president meant what he said that we will reach out our hand to any party that will on clench their fists. at the outset of this the administration, president obama stated we are prepared to deal with iran with mutual respect. and we made clear to their leaders how they could begin to rebuild confidence within the international community including granting access to their previously undeclared enrichment facilities and it's changing uranium for fuel to power a research reactor. as the world has watched and leaders refuse -- refused to take responsibility put their program violates its obligations under the nuclear

non-proliferation treaty and risks sparking a nuclear arms race in the middle east. when did not be ironic -- would it not be ironic that as the iron curtain fell and the mutual threats of nuclear destruction diminished among the superpowers that a new arms race would emerge and some of the most unstable parts of the world? it would be an irony that our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren would not forgive us for allowing to come to pass. in addition, iranaiisn leaders support terrorists from don't they allow the persecution of their citizens that take to the streets for peace, it a trail of

the duty of all governments in terms of what they owe their citizens. iran faces a stark choice, abide by international rules and rejoin the community of responsible nations, which we hope for, or face further consequences and increasing isolation. in the face of the threat they pose, we are committed to the security of our allies. that is why we deployed the face adaptive missile program, to deter and defend against missile could -- missile attacks on this continent. [applause] >> we are also working together inside nato to prepare for future security threats, including cyber security. we continue to support close security cooperation between nato and the eu.

last year, the u.s. and europe acted quickly and decisively -- decisively won the world was reeling from a dire financial crisis. in doing so, we collectively helped prevent a total collapse of the world economy. today, president obama and five are closely following the economic and financial crisis in greece efforts to deal with it. we welcome the support package that you are considering in conjunction with the imf. we will be supportive directly and through the imf of your efforts as a rescue greece. these examples show why europe continues to not just be america's largest trading partner but our most important ally. ladies and gentlemen, our predecessors came together more than six decades ago this week to begin to build institutions

designed to ensure that the 21st century's darkest chapters would not be repeated. those institutions and to this institution have been a great success but we now have to set our sights on the challenges of this new century. the world has changed. it has utterly changed. a terrible beauty has been born. perhaps the most complex threat we face today off is that posed to our own citizens by non-state actors and violent extremists. particularly, if god forbid, those extremists were able to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction. the scourged has no respect for borders. no single nation, no matter how strong or wealthy, organized or

capable, can meet this threat alone. but it can only be successfully contained if we make common cause. that is precisely what we must do. the new powers granted this parliament in the lisbon treaty gave you a greater role in that struggle and a greater imperative to govern responsibly. the u.s. government and this parliament have struggled over how to best protect citizens without yielding the foundational rights on which all of our societies are built. i am absolutely confident that we must and can protect our citizens and preserve our liberties. since taking office last year, president obama and i have been guided by our constitution's imperative come up to seek a more perfect union. toward that end, one of our

first official acts was to end the interrogation practices that produced few results and that we could not in good conscience continue. [applause] >> we ordered the closure of the detention center at guantanamo bay that has become a symbol of injustice and a rallying cry for terrorists. [applause] >> we appreciate the support, difficult as it has been, that you have provided in this effort. we did these things because like you cannot we reject the false choice between safety and ideals. we believe that upholding our principles only makes us stronger and by compromising them actually undermine our efforts in the broader struggle

against violent extremism. their purpose is to change what we value cannot change how we conduct ourselves. eight days after the september 11, a tax, i told a group of thousands of university students in my country that they cannot allow the tragedy of 9/11 and our way of life because that is exactly what the terrorists sought. i told the we cannot prevail and the struggle by acting alone. those words have not only fit that time but i think they have proven to be true and there are no less true today. i do not need to tell this audience about europe's proud tradition of protecting citizens. a commitment grounded in respect for the inherent dignity of all people.

we called them inalienable rights. we've broken into our constitution. our commitment to privacy is profound. it is as profound as yours. our constitution's fourth amendment protects individuals against unreasonable search and seizures by the state. that is one of our -- one of our most famous jurist declare that the right to be left alone. it has been made clear that privacy is a constitutionally- protected and fundamental right. like the eu, the supreme court has characterized this right as a matter of personal dignity. on a personal level, i have for 36 years defended privacy

rights. in the u.s. senate, every year, there are organizations that rate those most committed to civil liberties and every year, i was characterized as one of those four people picked. the reason i tell you this is not about me but about the commitment of our administration to individual rights. to change now would make a lie of everything i have said i stood for in my country. for the past 37 years. on the senate judiciary committee responsible for confirming judicial nominees, i said i was consistently ranked among the staunchest advocates of civil liberties and i made it a priority to determine perspective judge's views on privacy before deciding whether or not they could go on to the court.

president obama and i also believe that the government's primary and most fundamental and solemn duty is to protect its citizens. and protect the rights they hold. president obama has said that keeping our country safe is the first thing he thinks about when he wakes up in the morning and the last thing keeping some about before going to bed. i suspect that is held every world leader looks at the their role. indeed, no less than privacy, physical safety is also an inalienable right. a government that abdicates its duty to insure the safety of its citizens violates its rights and a government that silences dissidents or imprison criminals without trial. even as we gather here today,

our and abuse are employing every tool they can muster to conduct new in devastating attacks like the one that struck new york, london, madrid, and many other places around the globe. to stop them, we must use every legitimate tool available, law enforcement, military enforcement, that is consistent with our principles, values and laws. we are fighting on many fronts. from the brave men and women serving abroad to the patient and tireless law enforcement professionals investigating suspicious of financial networks. just this week, our customs and border protection, using passenger information data, apprehended a suspect in the attempted bombing of times square. it is vital that we maintain every capacity that we have under the law to stop -- to stop such attacks. we believe that the in finance

tracking program is key to our safety. it has provided critical leads to counter terrorism investigations on both sides of the atlantic come up disrupted plots, and ultimately has saved lives. it has built in redundancies that ensure personal information is respected and used only for counter-terrorism purposes. i do not blame you for questioning it. we understand your concerns. as a consequence, we are working together to address them. i am absolutely confident that we can succeed to both used the tool and a guarantee privacy. it is important that we do so. it is important that we do so as quickly as possible. as a former senator, i also know how hard it can be to make the hard choices required by global challenges while saying this -- while staying true to local values. all of you are going through

that every time you vote a suspect. the longer we are without an agreement on the terrorist financing tracking program, the greater the risk of a terrorist attack the could have been prevented. as leaders, we share a responsibility to do everything we can within the law to protect the 800 million people we serve. we have disagreed before. we will disagree again. i am equally convinced that the u.s. and europe to meet the challenges of the 21st century as we did in the 20th century, if we talk and listen to one another. if we are honest with one another. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, courage, winston churchill taught us, is what it takes to stand up and speak. correct is also what it takes to sit down and listen. also what it takes

to sit down and listen. i have been doing all the speaking. i can assure you that we are back in the business of listening to our allies. ladies and gentlemen, it is no accident that europe was my first overseas destination as vice-president and also the president's. it is no accident that we have returned several times since then. the u.s. needs europe and i perfect -- and i respectfully submit that europe needs the u.s. we need each other more now than we have ever. [applause] >> i view this anniversary as providing a welcome opportunity to reaffirm the bond our peoples forged long ago in the fires of adversity. and the pursuit of ideals and

partners, europeans and americans look to each other before they look to anybody else. now is a van -- now as then, we are grateful to be by your side in the struggle to get to come. i am here to state unequivocally, president obama and joe biden strongly support a united, free, open, europe. we strongly support what you are about. we wish you got speed and may god bless you all in may god protect all of our troops. thank you, very much. [applause] thank you. [applause]

>> thank you very much. it was a great invitation for future cooperation and talks. as you said, listen and talk to each other is very important. i would like to thank you for repeating the most important words of the last week -- europe needs america. the second world war, we were fighting side to side having

victory together, democracy. you added that america needs europe. we will remember that it is a good beginning of our partnership of our cooperation. thank you very much once again, mr. president. -- mr. vice president. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> at the state department briefing, a u.n. security council resolution calling for sanctions against iran. other topics include north korea's nuclear program, talks

with pakistani officials and a proposal by joe lieberman that would empower the state department to revoke the u.s. citizenship of individuals with ties to foreign terrorist organizations. this is 30 minutes. >> could afternoon and welcome to the department of state. it is foreign affairs day. have the foreign affairs day. the secretary celebrated foreign affairs day with the men and women of the state department and i thanked them for their service was delivering a general state of the department overview as she approaches her 500th day on the job. she also delivered remarks to the american foreign service association plaque ceremony to honor colleagues who lost their lives in the line of duty or under her wrote circumstances while serving their country overseas and we tragically added

three names to the plaque, victoria delong, who lost her life in the aftermath of the earthquake, they'll gredler, who was serving in cassocks stand -- cause expand -- khazakstan. the secretary had a 22 minute conversation with her european counterparts, the german foreign minister, u.k. political director, and you have representatives. -- and eu representatives. this is the type of interaction that they have with european counterparts. they talked about multiple subjects. the predominant discussion was to update a themselves on the status of negotiations toward a

u.n. security council resolution. in a similar vein, last night, our deputy in new york participated, along with other representatives from the security council nations, in a dinner hosted by the iranian foreign minister. it was a frank and professional exchange. several members of the council pointed out the significant flaws and shortcomings in iran's approach. the conversation of the foreign minister focused on the irani and counterproposal to the nuclear reactor which deviates in significant ways from the

ieae that they agreed to and walked away from last october. we see this as yet another missed opportunity by iran to meet its international obligations. regarding the oil spill, two additional nations have graciously come forward with proposals to offer assistance. vietnam and japan brings the total number of countries that offers assistance to 15. we continue to evaluate the offers that we have received and will make decisions theory soon. kurt campbell remains in manila. he participated in the u.s. lower mekong senior officials meeting. in the next few hours, he will

participate in the 23rd u.s. dialogue. we have one representative on his way to ethiopia " -- for meetings on sudan and a regional strategy. george mitchell just started a dinner meeting the israeli president. we expect to have additional meetings tomorrow before he returns to the u.s.. we expect late tomorrow night or early sunday morning to have a statement as he prepares to leave. finally, we are pleased to announce the appointment and arrival of barbara and schiller as the special representative for the international labor

affairs. she comes to us from the afl- cio where she served as the director of the international affairs department. she will lead the efforts to and willorkers' rights focus on strengthening embassies abroad. >> vietnam? what are they offering? >> i don't know. >> as of right now, nothing has been accepted. >> correct. >> on the iran, secretary's call, you said they updated the current status. what is that? >> we continue to work on the

specifics of a un resolution. there is still work to do. we will be moving that forward in the coming weeks. >> i presume to the people she spoke to all agree, correct? >> this conversation does not get into the specifics. it was more a case of where do we stand in the specific work of building a resolution. comparing notes on various consultations of the u.s. and other countries with those who would be in a position to evaluate the resolution and what is formally presented to the security council.

>> was rushed on the call? >> no. >> why not? >> this was one call. this was a call with our european counterparts. we do have these calls on a brick a basis -- on a regular basis. china and russia are not part of that component. that said, all of the country's and the security council, including china and russia, joined in pressing iran to change its course. we are very comfortable with where we are in terms of our interaction with them they p5 +1. >> which begs the question why you felt you should consult with dr. chinese and russian partners.

>> hazmat suggested, we have a lot of different groupings, depending on the issue. we're not excluding anybody. say,was a case, let's there were other topics of discussion. this was the primary focus of the discussion. ies have touched base with others. i would perhaps describe this as -- >> one other thing, there are reports that your plan is to put

forward the resolution to the full security council next week. is that correct? do you plan to put it forward next week? >> that plan is not correct. [inaudible] >> do you think iran is buying more and more time? >> this is something that concerns us. this week, iran had an opportunity with the president here and we heard nothing new. they are not in compliance with fair ieae legations and have not come forward with a meaningful or acceptable counterproposal. it was made clear to iran last night that they had the

opportunity to build confidence and their actions and words and simpson had done exactly the opposite. we are in a position where we are working closely but others in the security council and working on this resolution. we look forward to a very strong united international statement that tells iran they have to change course and meet fundamental obligations. >> could you comment on any possible interaction that mr. wolf had? >> on the margins of the meeting, he stressed that the united states continues to have concerns about the welfare of our citizens who are in iranian custody. he shared some letters from family members and stressed that

we would like to see these individuals released. >> i cannot characterize any reaction. >> [inaudible] >> you have heard something from him. it was talking about if this resolution comes forward, all ties will be cut with iran. obama is going to regret it. he seemed to have this very strong message this week of threat saying the u.s., our efforts in afghanistan and iraq

would be destroyed if we passed this resolution. he had some pretty strong words about that. thus the administration, what is the reaction? is it giving anybody pause? >> uno. a strong statement in significant pressure from iran is not going to engage significantly without that. we have clearly offered a path of engagement and it has been iran that has failed to reciprocate. iran is isolated and unless it comes forward and answers to questions of the international community, it will face additional pressures and additional isolation. >> was that the only subject brought up on the margins? >> i am not aware of any others. >> i did not say that.

i said in response to a particular question. >> you said it would take weeks for the resolution, right? >> it will take as long as it takes. we are working hard on this. i would expect there is still work to be done. we will work hard until it is completed. we have a sense of urgency about this but we are working as fast as we can. there is no specific timetable. >> pakistan, any further communication between the u.s. and pakistan with the investigation? anything they are saying in return or any more specificity?

>> we have had a range of contacts with the government of pakistan. we continued to develop information as the investigation continues. the flow of the information to pakistan has begun. with that flow, will come specific steps that we expect pakistan to take. >> is this an international issue? i think it. -- i think it goes beyond u.s. borders. >> that is true. >> [inaudible] >> there have been multiple plots that have involved the

u.s. citizens on both sides who have chosen to take these actions. i am not aware that there is any specific connection but clearly, we are looking to see, while this individual was in pakistan, who he met with, what support was provided and that is the reason we are working so closely with pakistan on this investigation. >> is there anything specifically today, more information, is there significantly more information? >> more, yes, significant come not hard to judge. -- significant, it hard to judge.

as we develop information that has a link back to pakistan, we are doing exactly what would be expected. we are sharing the information as we can. pakistan is also taking their own actions. the kind of dialogue that we need to understand what happens here and what happens there and eventually put these pieces together. that is exactly what we are doing. >> [inaudible] >> we have regular dialogue with india, including on counter- terrorism. i cannot say at this point there is an indian link to this case.

we do have dialogue with india on a regular basis. >> does the administration have a view on the legislation? >> we are taking a hard look at it. we do have -- it has constitutional implications including the 14th amendment citizenship clause. the bill is focused on amending the loss of nationality statute and up getting a list of expatriating acts to add terrorism related activities. we have seven specific circumstances under which citizenship can be forfeited. we are studying it.

as the secretary pledged yesterday, we are going to take a hard look at it. it is something that we have to evaluate. she indicated that these people that associate themselves with terrorism groups that are not -- that are at work with the united states so it is a serious matter. we are looking closely at that. >> did you find out the last time the state department used to this power? as i understand it, the law would expand the category that basically removes or revoke citizenship for people who join foreign armies. >> that is one of the criteria. >> that is the criteria that lieberman piggyback off of.

when was the last time we vote somebody's citizenship? >i do not no -- i know you do not know that right now. >> it is for enormous federal air war with the u.s. >> somebody who is naturalizing and a foreign state after the age of 18. the clearing allegiance to a foreign state after the age of 18. serving as an officer in a foreign state military or entering or serving their in. if the foreign state is engaged with hostilities with the u.s. after the age of 18. accepting a foreign government office or where agent oath of allegiance is required. renouncing abroad or domestically when the u.s. is in a state of war. some of those rest with the

department of homeland security rather than the state department. the last one is committing an act of treason against the u.s. there are constitutional implications to this proposal. we are going to study it. some of the assumptions behind the proposal are subject to court cases that are in the courts right now. their baby questions about constitutionality of what had been proposed. >> how did you find out the last time it was used. >> i will take the question. >> the law would basically require the state department to have a whole process set up. lieberman is acting like that process is already here. >> as the secretary said yesterday, we have expatriation

authority already under statute. this proposal by senator lieberman would essentially add to that authority. we do already have, within our affairs bureau, lawyers who evaluate these issues and do take action to remove the citizenship of individuals. there are many legal questions associated with this. >> all of the things you mentioned have to do with other states. the taliban and out kited did not fall under that category. what did the leaders tell you about that? >> one of the questions -- one of the assumptions behind these actions which can be taken under the immigration and nationality act in falls actions that are -- or the individual taking the

actions -- the actions are taken with the voluntary assumption that citizenship will be relinquished. there are legal issues inherent to the proposal and in cases that touch on this proposal. we are studying all of this. >> it only speaks to terrorist organizations. it would not have applied to the times square bomber, anyway. >> all the more reason to look hard at it. >> the elections in the u.k., any observations or comments or reactions? >> we are watching it closely. we look forward to continuing

our close cooperation with whatever government emerges. >> we knew that. >> this is a great day for political justice. it is a testimony to the vibrancy of the u.k.'s democratic system. the united kingdom is our strongest international partner. we have shared values and shared world view. we share responsibilities on many key fronts. that is not going to change. >> that is why on the phone call, it was a career person? >> i would assume so. [inaudible]

>> i know my counterparts have different views of that. this is our strongest partner. >> your counterparts have different views of what? the special view? >> the special relationship. >> [inaudible] can you give us a sense of the meeting to will be having with the state department and issues you want to raise with him? >> that is a good question. we are working on a complete agenda. he will be with us for much of the day next week. >> [inaudible]

>> i would defer to announcing key positions and being done at the white house. [unintelligible] >> i do not have a comment. i have not seen specifically what he has said. [no audio] >> i am not sure what the assumption of the six party process means. as we have said all along, we will be guided by north korea's actions. there are things that north korea has to do and they have to

meet their international obligations, sees provocative actions. that is what we will be looking for from north korea. [inaudible] >> we want to see north korea live up to its commitments. we want to see north korea seized provocative actions. that is our focus. >> to your note with the purpose of the meeting is or what there will be discussing? >> i will take that question. >> [inaudible] >> it is my understanding that the chinese government has given the dcm a readout of the

meeting. >> does that include north korea's position on the six party talks? >> we received a readout of the meeting. i cannot characterize what china provided to us but i assume it would be an indication of what china told north korea and what north korea told china. [inaudible] >> the national league for democracy decided back in march not to seek registration on the deeply flawed election laws under the terms of these patently unfair laws.

as of today, the nld is subject to do registration at any time. for more than 20 years, the leader has served as beacons of hope in burma and as inspiration to all who strive for democracy and justice around the world. we applauded the results of the nld to continue working for the people of burma. we will continue to work with all of those, including j. nld, who are dedicated to building the future of their country. if it is highly regrettable that the regime has created circumstances worthy nld felt they had to take steps. [inaudible] >> kurt is still evaluating what his travel times will be.

>> [inaudible] >> we obviously see the nld as part of a legitimate democratic opposition, as we have indicated to burma to the meetings we have had. ultimately, burma has to open up greater political space and have a meaningful dialogue with the political opposition as well as other ethnic groups. >> he wants to create favorable conditions for six party talks. >> if kim jong il wants to create favorable conditions for six party talks, he can do exactly what we outlined for months and years. meet its international obligations, pursued the to demint it made -- sees actions

that destabilize the region. >> a bit of housekeeping. can we get the statement posted for 2:00? that would be really helpful for those of us who try to sleep. you do expect a statement to come up. q inspect the parts of the talks to go it is scheduled for 2:00 in the aborted but i can see what i can do. >> maybe you can put it up someplace where it is actually daylight? >> we will see what we can do. >> do you expect the statement will be announced at the start of the proximity talks? is that your help? >> -- is that your hope?

>> we will have meetings in addition to the ones going on now and the statement will tell you where we think we are at the end of those meetings. >> you were on the record at the time of saying the talks had begun. >> then there was a hold. >> this will be their resumption? if it happens. >> maybe at 2:00 in the morning we will have it dramatic reading of our statement. >> your home phone number is what? >> it is listed. >> i know you are loath to stoop to senator mitchell but a fee is already having a meeting, one could logically conclude that the talks have hit a bump but are back on.

>> there are meetings taking place. when the meetings conclude, we will tell you what they mean. have a nice weekend. but this weekend, 10 leon -- ted leonsis. this sunday on c-span. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio and on line. you can connect with us through twitter, facebook and youtube.

>> a senate hearing with michael bloomberg, the police commissioner of new york and others. the terrorist watch list, gun purchases, and the attempted car bombing were the main topics. joe lieberman of connecticut chairs the homeland security committee. this is one hour 20 minutes. [no audio] >> i want to just assure you that the last person to appear this late at a hearing because she was held up in washington traffic was secretary of peloton no -- secretary napolitano.

we thank all the witnesses for being here today. i want to begin by extending, on behalf of all the members of the committee i am sure, and really the entire american family, our special thanks to myer bloomberg and commissioner kelly and all who work with you in new york city government and live in that great city, four year grace under pressure which remains still about the best definition i know of courage and for the brilliant law enforcement investigative work that you and your colleagues and the federal, state, and local law enforcement community's did to bring faisal shahzad to justice just 53 hours after his attempted terrorist attack on times square.

this. but what congress -- this hearing on what congress can do to keep firearms out of the hands of terrorists has made the urgency clear. the growing understanding of the dimensions of the plot to attack times square certainly should remind us of a reality that we sometimes forget which is that global islamist extremism, terrorists, have declared war on america. they are attacking our homeland with increasing frequency. in fact, they have attempted to carry out more than 12 attacks on america

most of them have been stopped by extraordinary and for some work. four of the attacks broke through our homeland defenses, including the failed attempts on christmas day over detroit and last saturday night in new york city. here is the fact that i will hope will focus our concern and attention and hopefully motivate our actions this morning. the only to terrorists attacks -- terrorist attacks on the americas since 9/11 that have been carried out successfully and taken american lives were carried out with firearms. the most lethal was in november of last year when an army doctor opened fire with eight semiautomatic weapon at a

processing center at fort hood, texas, killing 13 americans and wounding 30 others. fort hood was the death list -- deadliest terrorist attacks since 9/11 and the deadliest domestic attack against american troops in the history of our country. and an older smith and wesson revolvers. in june of last year, an event not too many people remember, an american who changed his name shot and killed a u.s. army recruiter and wounded another at a recruiting station in little rock simply because they were wearing the uniform of the u.s. military. he did so with an automatic

rifle. in other recent cases, homegrown terrorist cells have stockpiled firearms while planning an attack against personnel at fort dix, new jersey and in quantico, virginia. thankfully, great law enforcement work stop both of those plots, but had those attacks succeeded, many other americans would have lost their lives, as over 160 people did in the attacks on mumbai in november 2008 which were also carried out largely with firearms. so the threat we need to discuss israel. terrorists are but the semi- automatic weapons can inflect -- armed with semiautomatic weapons can inflict harm in seconds.

homegrown terrorists are generally less sophisticated than those trade overseas bell -- by al qaeda. -- trained overseas. they may also be harder to detect and stop, particularly if they are operating on their own. the easy availability of lethal weapons in shores these terrorists can legally obtain sufficient firepower to cause terrible damage. frank lautenberg, mayor bloomberg, and commissioner kelly will make clear we are not doing all we can to stop terrorists from buying guns. the stark fact is the u.s. department of justice has no authority to block the sale of firearms to suspected terrorists even when the department knows they are about to purchase guns.

this unfortunately, is not a rare occurrence. the number of times a suspected terrorist has been allowed with the government's knowledge to buy guns in recent years is stunning and infuriating. this morning the government accountability office will testify in the last six years terrorist suspects, people on watch lists, have tried to buy guns more than 1200 times. in 91% of those cases, they did buy guns. and the other 9%, they were stopped because they were on some other list, such as having had a criminal record of some kind. i think most americans understand and once they hear these facts will agree that this has to change.

we can do so and they can block terrorists from obtaining guns without compromising constitutional second amendment rights. a recent survey done by frank luntz showed 80% of nra members believed suspected terrorists should not be allowed to buy guns. in 2007, the bush administration proposed legislation to give the attorney general the discretion to prevent the sale of firearms to watch listed terrorists. it was not enacted. congressman king as previously introduce legislation to do just that. it is a straightforward, bipartisan bill supported by mayors and others all over the country, but especially those whose cities are prime targets of terrorists, including the

large diverse coalition that michael bloomberg leads. in my opinion, this bill should be enacted as quickly as possible to close this dangerous loophole it for another suspected terrorist is able to buy firearms legally and use them to kill americans. senator collins. >> thank you mr. chairman. our nation remains a target for terrorists. whether sent from overseas or radicalized within the u.s., terrorists continue to target innocent men, women and children. their callous disregard for life was on full display in new york city this past saturday. had it not been for an alert street vendor and the courageous action of the new york city police department, many lives

would have been lost and many people would have been injured. i applaud the affected investigative work by federal, state and local authorities that led quickly to the identification and a rest of the suspect allegedly placed the car bomb in the midst of tom square -- in the midst of times square. this reminds us that terrorists are unrelenting in their desire to kill americans. we cannot let down our guard and we must continue to meet this ongoing threat with that strength and resilience. from fort hood to the skies over detroit, and now to times square, our nation must come to grips with the terrorist threat, particularly the threat of homegrown terrorism. an alert citizenry is one of the

best defenses against terrorists attacks. signs in the new york city subway system reid, it you see something, say something. the u.s. capitol police ask those of us who work on capitol hill to pay close attention to "help beady eyes and ears with our local law enforcement." and as we saw in times square, and alert citizen can be our best line of defense against terrorist attacks. senator lieberman and i had introduced bipartisan legislation that would encourage individuals to report suspicious activity to the appropriate officials. the legislation is straight forward. it would protect individuals from lawsuits when they in good

faith report suspicious behavior that may indicate terrorist activity. our colleague, peter king, has introduced a bill on the house side. given the recent events in new york city, i encourage the senate judiciary committee to pass this important bill. during the past eight years significant resources have been devoted to the prevention of a terrorist attack using a biological, chemical, or nuclear weapon. but as recent attacks have shown, the improvised explosive device remains the weapon of choice for most terrorists. in 2009 alone there were more than 3700 terrorist incidents involving an ied world wide.

when terrorists turn items that can be found in an average family's garag ine to a weapon of death and discretion, it underscores the need of intelligence collection to identify threats as well as the need for a vigilance by authorities, business owners and all citizens to learn the warning signs that distinguish legitimate activity from the precursors to a terrorist attack. terrorists can also choose to use firearms. that is the issue that brings us here today. for many americans, including many families, the right to own

guns is part of their heritage and way of life. this is protected by the second amendment. this committee and this congress faces a difficult issue today. how do we protect the constitutional right of americans to bear arms while preventing terrorists from using guns to carry out their murders plans? this dilemma does not arise when we apply the terrorist watch list to the purchase of explosives. one of the more important accomplishments since 9/11 has been the creation of a consolidated terrorist watch list based on in permission from all parts of the intelligence community and the fbi.

our watchless system properly implemented can be an effective mechanism for preventing individuals with a suspected terrorist kinds from boarding an aircraft. it alerts law-enforcement to more carefully screen potential terrorists and allows the state department to revoke visas of foreign individuals who are attempting to travel to the u.s. with terrorist ties. the fact remains the evidence used to compile the watch list is often fragmented and can be of varying degrees of credibility. as senator ted kennedy discovered when his name was included, the watch list can be inaccurate. it is not the equivalent of a criminal history report. the latest doj report concluded

35% of those sampled from the list were left on the list based on outdated information or material and related to terrorism. incidence of mistaken application of the watch list are very unfortunate, but those areas -- those errors usually result in the restriction of a privilege, such as the right to board a plane or travel to the u.s. from overseas. the expansion of the watch list system to deprive law-abiding americans of a constitutional right is different and raises many critical questions. as we consider what seems to be an obvious step we should take,

we must carefully consider these questions. are there appropriate protections included within the watch list process to justify the potential denial of a constitutional right? if not, what procedural protections should be afforded those who are in erroneously denied the ability to purchase a firearm? what guidelines are needed to constrain the attorney general's discretion to prevent law- abiding americans from purchasing firearms? let me emphasize that none of us wants a terrorist to be able to purchase a gun. but neither should we want to infringe upon a constitutional right of law-abiding americans. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we will begin with frank lautenberg to describe the

legislation. then i would be honored to hear responses to this from mayor bloomberg. you have been a real leader on this. the bill you have introduced has been referred to the committee of legislative jurisdiction. we are holding this hearing in the dispatch of our responsibility for inquiring as to the impact passage of your legislation could have on our homeland security. we welcome your testimony. >> thanks very much. and members of the committee. i want to offer my welcome to mayor bloomberg and commissioner kelly. each of them has an enormous responsibility conducted well across the river from new jersey. one cannot help but note

[unintelligible] the incredibly brilliant police work that went on to get this guy before he was able to leave the country. it was fantastic. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for holding this critical hearing. i thank my fellow witnesses for joining us today. i think representatives peter king for introducing the legislation. this saturday we were reminded that terrorists are determined to kill americans on american soil. this story is below old, but shockingly enough. so hard to believe, an antique car packed with explosives discovered in times square -- an empty car.

the terrorists planned to set off an explosion and murder as many americans as possible. we were fortunate that this car bomb did not explode this time, but officials will do everything they can to stop a future attack. a loophole gives terrorists the upper hand. this loophole known as the terrorist gap allows known terrorists to purchase military-grade explosives and firearms legally. we don't want to rob people of their constitutional right, but i don't like saying this. but to err on the side of protection is a chance we have to take. it can be challenged in our court system without problem. as goa will testify, just last

year a person on a tear watchlist was cleared to buy explosives. how can it be? right now the government cannot walk -- blocked the sale of firearms to someone simply because they are on a terrorist watch list. it is pretty frightening to me. it defies common sense, but it is the lawn of a land. some of the same explosive agents to make roadside bombs in iraq are available for sale in italy to suspected terrorists here in our country. -- available for sale here to suspected terrorists. a u.s. citizen arrested at jfk airport in connection with the times square car bomb had a loaded gun in the car as he drove to the airport. if you look at mumbai, you can

see assault weapons are being used more and more. the fact is they are able to compact these weapons into smaller packages. that is why we need to change this long. convicted felons, mentally ill are forbidden from buying guns, but nothing keeps fanatics on the watch list from purchasing guns and explosives. it is hard to believe, but if it is true. now this gap is in our loss. -- in our laws. i have requested reports from the goa about the number of times the gap has been exploited. here is what we learned. from 2004 through february of this year, he terrorists tried

to buy guns 1228 times. ose cases they were given the okay to buy a gun. roughly 10% of these people were able to buy guns, but because of this gap, america is effectively hanging a welcome sign for terrorists. i have introduced legislation to close the gap. . king -- representaive king has offered a nearly identical bill. we want to deny funds to known and suspected terrorists. it does not sound like it is an impediment to living in this country. this commonsense legislation is

not anti-gun, this is anti- terrorist. a gun owner who objects has the power to challenge the ruling. that is why support is widespread. the bush administration which defended gun rights ask congress to pass this legislation. eric holder has indicated his support for our legislation. a former governor of new jersey, chairman of the 9/11 commission has urged congress to close this loophole. police chiefs had endorsed our legislation. the gun lobby tries to argue gun owners oppose the bill, not true. it was recently found 82% of nra members want congress to close this terror gap. everyone talks about making our country safer from terrorism.

this is our chance to do it. i thank you for holding this hearing. >> thank you very much. congressman king, -- a real fighter for the security of the american people. we welcome your testimony. >> thank you very much. a want to thank you publicly and tell you what a privilege it is to work with you in a bipartisan manner. it has been an honor for me to work with you closely on these issues. i want to commend frank lautenberg for his legislation and a special tribute to commissioner kelly, who the actions of the last 96 hours in apprehending the terrorist of new york is really showing police professionalism.

it is a testament to the work done by the nypd and the city is spending millions of dollars to protect itself against islamic terrorist attacks. the whole country observed over the last several days this is what goes on every day in new york i would ask that my testimony bait serve into the record. >> without objection. >> this is an issue of common sense. we are at war with islamic terrorism. and more frequently it is right here at home. one of the reasons is our policy overseas has been affected if. -- it has been effective. al qaeda is always adapting. they are attempting to find americans in this country who

are here illegally -- who are here legally where they recruit americans under the radar screen. they don't have known ties to al qaeda. it is harder for us to follow them. we have to expect more attacks from those in the country. the plus side is it is harder for terrorists to come in. it means those who are here who have not received sophisticated training are more likely to rely on whatever weapons they can get ahold of. when we see terrorists can have access to guns, i would ask all of us were here on 9/11. we remember the next day saying what could we have done to prevent this? i would just say if we find down islamic terrorists such as on saturday night to have terrorist

connections, somebody who actually has terrorist connections has carried out a massacre, whether it is in times square or tennessee, we would say how did we allow this to happen? we would have to explain even though we knew this person was a terrorist, even though we knew we are facing a threat at home, we still allow that person to buy a weapon and slaughter people. just think of what the american people would think of us. i agree with that completely. in the legislation that i have,

we provide legal weapons -- provide little -- leagal. this legislation was drawn up after the report. i would be willing to adapt my legislation to -- nobody wants somebody to be on a list wrongly, but it would balance the equity, we are facing a possible murder of american citizens by al qaeda supporters , islamic terrorists. there is no real debate here so long as there are protections in here. it is on the side of protecting the american people. we saw the guns were bought for the attacks at fort dix. senator lieberman mentioned the attack in arkansas. and whatjor hassan

he carried out at fort hood. they did not even have a terrorist record. think how much worse it would be if we allow someone with a record to buy those weapons. 91% of those on the list were able to do purchase weapons. it is outrageous. this should not be a partisan issue. president bush -- the bush administration was pro-guns. they strongly supported this legislation. and the obama administration supports it as well. bipartisan legislation such as this which is dealing with a present danger. maybe if this was the year 2000 we would say it is someone speculating. how many more potential attacks

do we have to have before all the american people realize this is a real enemy that is amongst us? thank you very much for holding this hearing. i look forward to working in a bipartisan way to make sure the legislation is entirely compatible. this is not a work of art. i will be glad to change it anyway weekend so long as the bottom line is the american people are protected from terrorists who have guns. it is common sense. the only logical step we can take -- how close this enemy is. i thank you for allowing me to testimony -- to testify. >> thanks very much.

mayor bloomberg , thanks for being here. this was scheduled a long time ago. i appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to come here. i could say a lot about it. at a time when -- most of it is good. at a time when it is clear the american people have lost confidence and in some much of this government, if you set a standard of leadership and competence. i thank you for that, as well as everything else we have thank you for. >> thank you very much. i can say is some good things about you. thank you for having us today. it is a great opportunity for us to tell the affairs committee of what is going on and why we need help from washington. you said the government

accountability office released new data showing suspects on the terrorist watch list were able to buy guns from licensed you as dealers. that is a dangerous breach of national security. it raises a very basic question, when gun dealers run background checks that they have to send to the fbi, shouldn't fbi agents have the authority to block sales to those on the terrorist watch list and deemed too dangerous to fly? i believe that they should and said do 500 people --500 mayors. but they do not. it is time to close this terror gap in our gun laws. at a time when the threat of terrorism is still very real, it