♪ ♪

>> protecting the night states again cyber attacks. the role of private networks and cyber security brita the communicators on c-span and the sunday, david cameron and the deputy prime minister and nick clegg at their first news conference since forming their coalition government. also, a gordon brown as he let numbers 10 downing street. for blacks and mexican president calderon arrives -- >> mexican president calderon arrives. this panel looks at issues including immigration, border

security, a drug trafficking, and this data mexico's economy. .t is about 1.5 hours b it is a real pleasure to have some panelists that i will mention in a moment. thank you for your mobility. we are fortunate to have with that c-span. this is a room that works much better for the filming of an event like this. next week, president calderon will be in washington for a state visit with president obama. this is a culmination of a number of high-level visits. obama has been to mexico twice during this administration. we as seen secretary clinton and others could to mexico.

there are a number of issues like migration that are hotbed issues. they tied the two countries together. there are issues of renewable energy. a lot of things that could be on the u.s. is mexico and agenda. state visits are an opportunity to focus. they focus the administration and focus all of us who are interested in mexico and u.s. /mexico relations. we thought it was a great opportunity. we are pleased you could join as to take stock of where mexico is. we are going to try to do both within the context of 1.5 hours.

let me do a quick infomercial. we have been working very hard to the number of colleagues on a series of projects, some of which you have seen. i want to highlight something that we have been putting together with other colleagues. you will see a number of papers coming oot on this. one of our board members has been one of the members who is somewhere in the room. this should be interesting for anyone following this issue. there is a paper on renewable energy that just came out. rob has just published something on civic and political participation the cannot on monday. -- came out on monday.

this is a fact book on mexico and u.s./mexico relations. we will be flooding your e-mail boxes. a lot of things may be useful for those that follow u.s. and mexico relations. there is a book that we just got copies of. it is on amazon. it is a number of colleagues. there are a number of very distinguished mexican and u.s. dollars. but me introduce our panelists. we will do this as a conversation. her last book is, it was a satirical history of mexican politics, one of the most traded things i had seen in any country. the to this from the mexican

cartooning heritage. this is a very creative and a list. she won the journalism project in mexico. she is prolific as a scholar and intellectual. juan pardinas was a panelist. he is one of the new voices in mexico. he is one of the voices you will hear more of overtime. he had a project on and transparency. he is spending a lot of work to make public finances more accountable to average citizens. shannon o'neal is the douglas dillon a fellow for latin america and council on foreign

relations. eill is theo'n douglas dillon fellow for latin america and council on foreign relations. she will be live get where mexico and the u.s. are today. she is been doing a great deal of work. david shirk is the director of the transborder institute at the university of san diego. he has been doing some of the best work out there on a lot issues and security cooperation and contemporary in mexican politics. we are very proud to have him here. without that, but jump into the substance.

denisre, tell us where mexico is today. what is the mexico that is the partner of the united states, the mexico under calderon? what has happened to the role of the military? >> i think that too frequently attention in the united states is focused exclusively on the war on drugs, organized crime and violence that has accompanied it to the detriment of a sustained analysis of mexico's domestic politics and economy. i like to focus on the trends that will be key to understanding mexico's future that go beyond the drugs and organized crime agenda. for the next three years, mexico will be a country where everything is determined by the forthcoming presidential election.

that will be key. it the second half of the calderon term, the last three years of this term will be focused on retaining the presidency and the context of declining fortunes of his party. if you look at the polls today, the former ruling party is positioned to regain control of the political system. the current governor of the state in mexico is a front- runner in most of the polls. the pri is positioned to win 10 out of the 12 governorships better open. why is this the case after only nine years since we celebrated mexico's transition to an

electoral democracy? they are celebrating these victories. why are we facing what could be a political repression? i frequently explained this in terms of the putin is nation of mexico. -- putinization of mexico. in the perception that the mexican state is failing to address those issues successfully, i think there is a nostalgia for role and order, experience, for the people who really knew how to do things. they are marketing themselves as precisely as that sort of party. the pri is building as i speak a coalition, i think a successful political coalition, that

includes the oligarchs, union leaders, corporate structure that is still very strong, and the vested interest entrenched in the country's economic structure. it would like nothing more than two perpetuate the status cool web policies of extraction has been a sign of mexico's political economy. this coalition that continues in mexico is still field by oil. we are witnessing the reemergence of the pri. i view this as a potential political repression. it can be explained by the collapse of the mexican left. i think they bear enormous responsibility for this outcome.

if you live at the polls, many of those who had left the prd have joined the ranks of the pri. there has been no effective counterweight. the possibility of creating a coalition has not been possible. legitimacy ofrd's calderon's government. it is key to explaining why it is that the pri is returning without having modernized itself. how does this leave calderon who is coming here next week in terms of the rest of his government? popular opinion supports the president as someone [unintelligible] people appreciate the fact that he is at least waging this war

even though it is not affected. his party is being punished at the polls. for a widespread perception of what we call [speaking spanish] despite the fact that some reforms have been passed. these minimalist reforms that we could argue are correct steps in the right direction. they have proven to be too small in terms of creating a dynamic market economy, creating jobs, and raising the tide that the lift all boats. this has not been the case. it has not been the case because the national party has failed to take on the old regime. the national action party both

under the ebay calderon -- philippe -- felipe calderon -- you see a great deal of questions posed for acting as the pri did when it came into power, acting in the same driven way that the pri did for so many years. there is disappointment with the democratic process. there is disappointment with the national action party. calderon's war on drug is not popular enough to translate into electoral gain for his party. he was not forceful enough in his first three years to push reforms that would have made the

political system more representative, accountable, or make the economic system much more competitive. what is he trying to do now? i think he views the midterm as a wake-up call. now you see him trying to push forward a series of reforms that he did not advocate during his first three years. he is trying to position himself as a reformist that he was not in his first three years in order to present a reformist face to the electorate while trying to smoke out the pri or put it where it has to adopt a public position on reforms the president is advocating such as citizen can this is a and anti- monopoly agendas.

these reforms are important. i celebrate them because they have been on the agenda and many democracy in system led groups for many years. mexico has an electoral democracy that amounts seto thi. it has to be more accountable. calderon has made this agenda his. these reforms and a lame duck presidency house of left them zero -- have left them zero chance of being enacted. while the president is to be commended for the reformist basie is adopting, it is pretty clear that the reforms will not be passed in the remainder of his administration. they would need the support of the pri.

today they have a majority with the green party. it could enacted these reforms on its own without even the support of the left. that will not be the case because of the interest that the coalition is descending. they believe it is not have to modernize itself or to enact these reforms in order to come back into power. it is enough to position itself as the party of experience, security, continuity. they continue to advocate or prop up the patronage driven machine that is leading to the electoral home victories. what does this mean for mexico? it means and a naturally driven and putin de.

it means mexico continues to muddle through. you will not see aggressive reforms passed. you will probably witness the re-emergence, resurrection of the party that is at the door after only 12 years since mexico experience the transition to the electoral democracy. >> thank you. where do you: in differ? >> i would like to have a different approach. s. now have several mexico' it is very different of inexperienced people elsewhere are having. it is how we experience they

organized crime is totally different. mexico is becoming a real federal country. each region is having distinct problems as a whole. this contrast gives me an optimistic view of the future of the country. the pessimistic view is based on the noose we have had in the last months and years. there are things happening that would be unbelievable just a few years back. there are things that have happened in the last month. they have the games and the social support in some areas of monterrey for organized crime. that was something unimaginable in mexico a few years ago.

how the different levels of governments are coping with the threat. it is a source of pessimism. that to be my source of optimism. i see a strong movement of society that i have not seen before. in mexico, we did not have collective action. we do not have the possibility of consumers organizing to protect rights. through organizations that were born by the leadership of some citizens, they are starting to push the idea of having collective action past. it happened last year. then we saw in the last election a huge movement promoting the blank votes,

saving a candid it was good enough for the expectations of the people. -- stating no candidate was good enough for the expectation of the people. this movement was highly criticized. in mexico city, it got 10% of the boat. it was the fourth largest political force in mexico city. it was a sparked for the political reform that was put it forward by president calderon. summary guards are much more organized. that gives me a sense of optimism. regarding the war on drugs, i think we are seeing the function

collapse in mexico. the federal system of security is not working. we have the municipal police becoming the first line in the war against organized crime. i want you for a few seconds to walk in the shoes of a municipal policemen in mexico. the mafia and the drug dealers know where your family lives, where your children go to school. the daily route to take from your home to your job. one day they come and say that if you do not work with us and if you do not receive this amount of money, you are going to pay a very high price. i think the way our institution for security are organized are not in the human instances.

they do not respond to human nature. i am sure i would start operating with the drug lords if my family is threatened. if we have institutions that do not work with human nature, we have a problem. we are putting these people at risk. we are giving them very small salaries and asking them to morartyrs.oes or marche i am worried how the lack of urgency of the mexican political parties are addressing these issues. nobody wants to see the elephant in the room. it took three years for the mexican government to address the municipal policeman.

they are becoming corrupt and penetrating the mafia and working with them. in a way, as a mexican taxpayer, i am financing the zero bodyguards of the drug lords. the taxes are paying the policemen that are being forced to work with them. the system keeps on going. a few governors have addressed the issue. this cannot go on. one of the biggest criticisms we can make regarding the war on organized crime -- maybe when it began in 2006 he did not have

any alternative. it initiatives have not gone with an institutional criticism and how this should change in the long term to creates a new and stable system of security in mexico, there has not been an institutional response on which to be the long term. would we say the state police in 10 or 20 years come? that lack of institutional change is a source of worry. regarding the fact -- if we see the polls today, it is very feasible that the pri will come back. if we saw the last presidential elections in mexico, in 1994 there was an attempted

assassination. he was the man to be president. he was killed. in 2000, [unintelligible] ent the game. he did not reach the presidency. in 2006, lopez had 14 months at the top of the polls. the next month he would become president. now we see him in the same position lopez was. he might become president. that to be the most feasible thing to happen the constant in -- happen. the constant would be that unexpected things happen.

it is not a fact that he will win the election. the image that the pri want to portray that they know how to govern, i think it could be very highly questioned if we see the stage with the highest levels of violence. ] all the states are governed by three governors. i wonder the fact that the new party comes back to power will be the first step toward a solution. . .

>> if you think back on the last 20 years and mexican presidents' visits, they are driven by ambitious agendas.

salinas in the 1990's, the agenda was moscow. this agenda for next week will not be as ambitious as those. in part for optimistic reasons, in part for pessimistic reasons. the biggest issue today has been security. one reason this is not ambitious is because the u.s. and mexico have worked well 3 years on this agenda, so this is more pushing forward in small forms, a security agenda that has been quite developed, starting with the merit initiative under bush. under obama, we have seen a transformation of the merit initiave from military focus

to getting up the socioeconomic factors underlying violence at the border, and we saw officials led by hillary clinton going to mexico city to hash out the agenda. so a lot of this has been done, and this side is really ratification and fleshing out of details on particular programs that have happened in the last few months. an issue that would be quite ambitious next week is north american competitiveness, and where that goes. obama put forth he wanted to double exports in 5 years, quite ambitious, but mexico and north

america would have to be part of the equation. private-sector companies like intel or caterpillar or ford or others, the way they produce in the u.s. has much to do with ties in canada and the u.s. if they don't put plants in mexico or canada, they put them in china or brazil or other places. here they are able to import to mexico and take them to other markets. in china, they don't use u.s. import. putting a plant in mexico might take 200,000 jobs out of the u.s., but it saves jobs. integration happens that does not happen in other parts of the world.

so for the benefit of the u.s. and mexico, this issue should be on the agenda. we hear about some border issues, but not a big, ambitious agenda speaking about the medium-toolong-term agenda. what we will see most likely is immigration on the agenda. this is a very difficult issue in the u.s., quite polarizing, and also in mexico, particularly because of the new law passed in arizona. president calderon must mention it to play to his home audience. if she went without mentioning what happened in arizona, it would be difficult for him to

come back home. that said, it is difficult on the u.s. side to touch too deeply or push too hard on this about how unjust you think this law is, because as we know, immigration politics in the u.s. are polarized. called iran and obama by all accounts agree on arizona, and neither are in favor of it, but it is seen not so much as a foreign-policy issue as a domestic policy issue. there will not really be any revolution coming out of this. the final issue that will be on the agenda that is perhaps the most positive one or new want to be put on the agenda is the issue climate change. we have right now two presidents in called iran and obama who are interested personally in issues of climate change, green energy and technology.

we also have a situation in mexico being the next host of the united nations conference of party's conference. mexico will be the next copenhagen coming up in december. so for colder on it is very important that this is a success, very important that something comes out of that meeting, global leaders come together on this unprocess, and to do that, the u.s. has to be on board in some way, shape, or form. there can be an agreement reached. so what the united states can put on the table will be part of the discussion, and most likely will we will see as a focus on small, concrete programs. i do not think that anybody will

see a tree with legally binding emissions targets put forth in six months, but there are some areas where the u.s. and mexico can work together. particularly on the financing mechanisms for mitigation, adaptation, how developed countries and large emerging economies like china and the united states are going to work with the least developed countries to mitigate the effects of climate change and transfers of money promised in copenhagen. this is an issue of reaffirming the status quo, but not a big, ambitious agenda.

>> david, tell us, are they getting it right on the security strategy? are they going? should we be looking for a large number of designated homicides going down in the near future, at the development of a modern to the sheer force in mexico, an issue with the white house on consumption. what is out there beyond security? >> i especially enjoy working

with andrew on this project. let me take one step back. to just talk about that context a little bit, pessimism looms large in the discussion, and certainly some of the things mentioned, u.s. public perception of mexico is at an all-time low since nafta began, and images the public sees of mexico, the assessments, the security partners and trade partners, despondently low. but we also have got very difficult issues on the bilateral agenda like immigration, trucking.

mexico would like to see nafta move to a different level where we can have free flows of not only commerce but [inaudible] running across the border. specifically, there are a number of very difficult, unresolved issues pointed to. while security has loomed largest in the u.s., for ordinary mexicans, since calderon was elected in 2006, the issue has consistently been the problem of the economy and specifically today, probably 40% of mexicans live in poverty, and poverty means less than $5 a

day. also the issue of inequality, although so many mexicans live in dire circumstances,, mexico is also home to the world's richest man, carlos slim, and the reason he is so rich as because mexico has an extremely and competitive domestic economy -- uncompetitive domestic economy. on top of this, the idea that in 2012 we will see a. victory, and for people who have championed mexican democracy and have concerns about whether they have changed their ways, it is still the same party at work as years ago and before, and this

all adds up to a half or three- quarters empty glass and we also have to take in consideration the other side of things. u.s.-mexican relations are at an all-time high of several indicators in terms of levels of security cooperation, the simple extent or attentiveness of engagement by the u.s. between the u.s. and mexico is that a significant high, and fortunately for mexico and the united states, on problematic issues like arizona, the obama and called ron administration's securely agree about that particular issue. also, speaking about economic

situations in mexico, it is very easy to be dissatisfied, but the reality is that mexico is in a very different place than it was 10 years ago or 15 years or 20 years ago. mexico is seemingly devaluation- proof, and the sense not that they are free from the evaluation, but that it is a very significant devaluation than the pace last year, not even a blip on people's radar screen, suggesting there have been fundamental changes in mexico's macroeconomic picture which are ultimately quite positive, and add to that, we have seen mexico's gdp in terms of purchasing power actually

increase to what economists like to see as a watershed, the $10,000 a year marked, and some of that could just be because carlos slim had a couple of good days of the stock market, not a perfect measure, but it does suggest that things are not entirely bad, and it is easy as the green go to have that bring go idea where when you're not immersed in these problems on a daily basis, earning less than $5 a day, it is very easy to be sanguine about these issues, but i think there is no going back to 1988. almost a quarter-century ago, there is no going back to 1988 when we saw mexico's last great fraudulent election, suffering a

triple-digit inflation, when we saw many people very dissatisfied, and mexico is in a different situation, and our relationship with them as different as a result. shannon mentioned that we had moved to this new framework for relations, this new security framework which focuses on dismantling these four pillars, dismantling drug-trafficking networks. and actually, we had fairly significant success over the last decade, with at least three of the four major drug trafficking organizations in mexico, a high-ranking members of field organizations, but we have taken out -- a man who is now a resident of the united

states, and we will soon be welcoming mario villa nueva, soon to be extradited, and we have very recently taken out an important collaborator with the cartel and other collaborators of other cartels, not to mention significant operations against law familiar and other new or organization can -- and other newer organizations. that lends to rumors -- >> rumors are unconfirmed, right? >> that is correct. but be -- the administration's

goal, their major level of success has been on a point of dismantling drug traffic, and the other issue is building effective judicial sector institutions. mexico has made progress, and we're actually talking about trying to strengthen it, moving to a more effective judicial system, those are more important. and the idea of a 20% reporter, up 20% for it with about two in order of the century, but i was reading the wrong thing from

the 90 '90s. preventing southbound flows is something the u.s. and mexico have to work together, focused on the point of sale, focused on where the problems can be effectively addressed. this is a tremendous innovation, putting in the agenda the addition of strengthening

society and some measure of job creation or creating economic opportunity so that the young people today who are involved in illicit activities to do not really have any other options because in some places like juarez, people aged 18 to 30 by the work in a short study in school, so they are idle hands, and the idea of thinking with mexico about how we can promote a greater degree of prosperity and opportunity, a greater degree of competitiveness as an economic region brought i think is exciting, important, and we are far from really advantage of that agenda significantly. it needs to be much more strongly put on the table. i do have some ideas about measures of success, and i will end with this. it is great to make waves

against organized crime and that is what the administration's have been advocating. the problem is it consistently and historic will lead over the last century to one predictable result, and that is more violence and death. we have seen 300 drug-related killings in mexico, and we could be looking at 8000, a significant increase for the mexican public, you can rest of+ the bad guys you want, but as long as people are dying by the hour, it is not going to be

possible. and lastly, for me ultimately, why are we doing this? theoretically we want to reduce the availability, flow, and conception of drugs in the united states. how was that working out? it does not appear that we have made a great deal of success, approaching the majority of american voters, people age 18 or experimented at least at some point in their lives with the use of drugs. that is abominable. that is not acceptable. we are not able to control consumption. the obama administration said it would try to gee a handle on that open the next five years, but not many people would say it is a game changer application of resources so in the meantime,

looking around the country and think states like california going it completely the opposite direction and possibly voting to legalize the assumption of certain drugs, but it really makes you scratch your head and say what is all this for? >> queer bar to open this up to the audience. but let me go back in -- we are going to open this up to the audience. what does caldron need? >> he wants recognition for his bold moves, his bravery. his willingness to take on organized crime at a time in which he is becoming increasingly unpopular in his home country.

middle interest term, his main policy initiative is being questioned by many mexicans, as the polls reveal, at a time when it is not clear that the war on drugs is actually reducing violence but it is rather fueling it. at a time when his party faces increasing political competition and has not fared well. once he says all the right things in terms of applauding what he at dawn of the last three years, he can carry that back to mexico and bolster his political legitimacy in the context in which he is in my ways a lame duck, a weak president.

i think he comes here on a quest for validation, gratification, and political capital. >> what about next week's visit? >> they need to make sure a bet calderon visiting and talking about immigration does not hurt them in trying to deal with the agenda. with climate change, they need

president called iran to it least recognize that it is on the table, and potentially there's a chance for about passing and just to play along with that even though it looks very unlikely that will pass. they need mexico to play along on that side, but in general they need to pack calderon on the back because they have a vested in security and taking on the bush merde initiative. they need to validate that this is the way forward, mexico, and in general being seen together and talking about things and a positive way, that it is worth this investment and security and security they broadly defined with those economic factors and their 20% reporter. they need to get out of it that this is a good investment for the u.s. that should continue to go on, because many in the

administration wants to do this. many are less sure about whether this is a good investment. >> david, tell us, what would be a preliminary view that america has been coordinating. what would be the strategy, likely that would be locked into policy over time? how do you get this right? >> well, if this is that the idea of getting it under control and preventing access to drugs for consumers, you have got four possibilities. in have strategies with dealing with the black market and drugs.

one is complicity, or what mexico would call confidencia, working hand in glove with traffickers, except in bare existence and taking occasional bribes. but if the way drug trafficking in the u.s. -- that is the way the drug trafficking in the u.s.-mexico relations worked for many years, with border official another blow bubbles getting snared up. the second is to take on cartels, which we have done for the last decade, the idea of dismantling organized crime. some people call that the hybrid strategy, because like in the political beast, you cut off the head, and a new one grows back. so there are ramifications.

thirdly, you can try to reduce consumption. unless you are willing to put very serious resources into that effort, it is dubious that you can decrease the availability of drugs and therefore decrease traffic. a 15% reduction in your consumption of drugs at the obama administration proposal will not take a whole lot of money out of the pockets of traffickers. the last option, which no one has wanted to talk about for many years is the idea of trying to regulate with some kind of legalized scenario. i think whether the administration's like it or not,

it is in tune with the majority of the american public, which opposes the idea of drug legalization right now. we are on a path for legalization in the sense that states and localities are beginning to examine possibilities, whether it is a dozen or so states that allow medical consumption or states like california that are broken and need additional tax revenue. whatever the reason, we're seeing a shift, and with a person who is an open drug user -- was an open drug user and the white house, that is a sea change in the weight that the office is viewed.

>> what does calderon -- what can he do in the last 2.5 years that will leave all legacy? >> i think he has a huge problem with his legacy. he had a opportunity for mexico

city and surrounding areas, but that was intended to dismantle the union and company, but what institution would be there in 20 years, finding him as the mascot, for example? he needs something for the mexican people to be remanded by. to create the mexican equivalent of the federation, what would be the -- what is the answer. why would you asked me such a difficult question?

[applause] >> thank you for those watching this on video cassettes as well as c-span. on may 24, we will be launching and john will join us as a commentator. we are going to take eight -- we will do three questions and come back to the panel. >> fisa sit with the center for strategic and international studies. you ask the question you did about the domestic considerations in this country as to what will happen, and this really is a political commentary. the united states presidents

must comply. senate majority leader harry raid has filed on the comprehensive energy and climate change legislation by announcing that he would push immigration legislation this year, and lindsay gramm, the supporter of the climate change legislation, announced he would drop off. there's happened a habit of making grand promises that are hard to keep. this is pure speculation, but i think a lot will depend on how the major news media play not just the statement, but the news conference itself. but the new york times and wall street journal may force

president obama to say something that he would rather not say about pushing immigration. it depends a lot of weather is a slow news day -- on whether it is a slow news day. >> i remember in this country, disastrous midterm elections, and lot of people saying that president clinton did not do anything big, he was always giving press conferences talking about school uniforms or creating stability in underserved communities, that sort of thing. somebody on the panel give us a list of those kinds of things which the mexican population would respond to, because the u.s. population responded to

president clinton's initiatives positively and resoundingly. >> let me add, is there any chance that his signature effort of dealing with organized crime, are we going to look back in three years and say that there were gains on judicial and police reform? i am pessimistic, but is it possible to say three years from now that would be a legacy? >> i have a question for denise. my name is marcus. a few days ago, there was a discussion in the new york times about trafficking in mexico and it was mentioned that 30% under the poverty line, 75%

of 40% believe they actually belong to the little fox. in this context, one of the biggest challenges for my perspective in terms of mexico's political system is that it was short-lived, and all of these people can hear a, you pointed out several times, i would like your perspective on that.

why is it these people still believe they are leading? >> cheyenne and o'neal and diane negroponte mentioned the trucking issue, and yet a specific decision which our presidents could make next week is say timetable for lifting the prohibition against mexican technology driving in the united states. we are not in compliance, and there's the retaliation that has

particularly hurt california, so engagement on that issue of trucking would be a standard step. i would like your opinion. >> ok. the problem with the legacy is that most issues are quite unpopular, always going down because we do not have real energy reform, and that we will have to do this uncomfortable thing for access. it is so new that the mexican public do not want to hear it. they do not want to hear that other countries extract it.

the sad part of this is we do not have the reforms, and we're having hard times in order to be elected in 2012, and i want to make a point, all the responsibility of the reforms of called ron, i think he has taken on an irresponsible opposition, and there is an open debate about governance in power, but it is very clear there's a lack of creative in trust in the opposition, and as a mexican, i

was appalled about the criticism against president obama saying he has not achieved anything. he was not allowed to achieve anything. if the position is just concerned with the next election and favoring a candidate, the country will not change. >> i think his legacy is going to depend on whether the national action party is capable of containing the presidency in 2012. if the ball is kicked out of the field and that election, it would be viewed as a sales president, as something --

someone who after 12 years was not able to fundamentally change the country in a way that created a broad constituency. however, if his party wins, and that could happen, my initial comments, and give you a photograph of mexico today, and that photograph could change with the campaigns abroad, as we're forced to have debates. democracy is the institutiooal edition of uncertainty, and in that sense, mexico is an electoral democracy, because we cannot foresee the next will be, but in terms of who dominates, who has the resources and majority of governorships, i think without question today is

the day. however if it is a good basis, involved in a scandal, and his party divides come but he will be credited for maintaining stability, and commended for taking on drug traffickers and organized crime, commended for the beginning of an anti monopoly agenda by dismantling, for taking the initial steps on education reform, viewed as a reformer who could not go as far as he wanted to because of the institutional constraints. but that is contingent on the results of the next presidential

race. i will make a bet today, and if i lose, you can hear me in three years at another one of these forms. the mexican left has no possibility of leading the next election, and that is a shame that the electorate has imploded, because mexico need a functional, effective counterweight and match that can negotiate it congress, and we would have a very different presidency had the head someone to negotiate with. he is trying to do so now and it is interesting to see the reforms to put forward are

supported by the left. in response to your question, the no's have been winning. who is he talking about? he is talking about those to veto and do not want mexico to change. it does not check with an optimistic portrayal. he is not talking about my country, he is talking about the place we would like to live in, but not the country that has moved sideways over the past few years. we have not move forward

significantly, particularly in terms of our potential and what competitors have been doing battle last several years. >> i think mexico has moved ahead, but so far below potential that it is frustrating. you look and say perhaps in come and transparency have gone up, a lot of good things to talk about, but for those in mexico who know what mexico could be, it has moved so slowly that it is agonizing. is that fair? >> i think that mexico is a more competitive place, that is certainly true, and it is not a safer or more equitable society what has been economic growth

over the last 15 years. it has been 1.5% a year. that is the demographic characteristic we how -- have come and it is leading to economic stagnation, and i think that has produced a country that is divided. i remember digitoxin's article right before the 2006 presidential race and in one photograph that was all of the lower and middle-class, public dwelling's created with a huge public housing boom. they were all going to vote for the lead they call the road -- felipe calderon, because they

were stakeholders. next to economic factors, there is what you see out of every mexican city. all of the people in the front are going to vote for the competition. what you have in mexico today is a stalemate of two factions. 30% of the population calls itself the middle us because it is a beneficiary of many of the reforms of the last 12 years, but the rest of the country is willing to go out and vote for an anti-institutional populist politician. so we have seen mexico moves sideways, and beside ways means falling back, and it means is

difficult to win because the constituency is not large enough. when i say the no's, i mean unionists, even party leaders. but to what extent is this a functional democracy when there is no reelection? mexican democracy is like a green dog, too exotic. why? because it >> some of the fundamental traits that any fundamental democracy would need to be accountable and representative, including the elections, and at the same time

has elements like public spending, artists among the wealthiest in the world, but zero accountability because there's no election. so i know this all to it that because a discussion of the glass half full or half empty, but if the glass were half full, how would you explain the election that you saw in 2006 where people took to the streets for over four months precisely because we have a country of nafta. , and the stalemate continues and mexico is a fertile ground

for any sort additional politician that will to get the status quo, or becomes a fertile ground for political repression, the of the pri appealing from before, because of least there was stability, not as much of violence, a patronage that gave thanks to people who put their hands outstretched, and frankly i think that's still made is what explains the electoral results we're seeing which are not good for the political process in the future. >> david? >> i think on the legacy issue,

before one bearing, i agree with most of what denise has to separate. i agree completely that it depends very much on what happens. there is a chance the other side could win and something could happen to cripple the party. but i say every election has been the election to lose in 2012, and the last few elections they could not agree to get along and that is largely where they lost, more so than perhaps we may like to believe. so assuming they do win, we may look back and see president calderon as the man who took mexico to war against itself and

lost, a man who neglected the initial promises when taken office to become a jobs president but instead became the war on drugs president. that said, i want to talk very briefly about the secret to being an optimist, the secret to understanding mexico as the place we would like it to be, and the secret is to have low expectations and a long time horizon. next door has and will continue to make progress in the long run. unfortunately, no idealist can ever be an optimist, because in the long run, we're all dead, as maynard keane said. i tend to focus on problems mexico confronts is enormous, and we can focus on their

potential, and what mexico has not been able to do, and we should, having that as our guide motivation, but pragmatically we have to understand that we need to appreciate what the progress we can make in the short term, and still look at alderon making modest progress on issues elusive to previous administrations. energy reform, tax reform. sure, it is not enough, and justice reform will be costly, and nowhere near where we need. pension reform is something we have not been able to deal effectively in the u.s.. these are huge problems and even a modicum of progress in the context of divided government -- i mean, welcome to democracy.

this is how democracy's work. they did not make grand, sweeping advances. like nafta or health care reform, because only dictator can do that effectively. i do not want to oversell mexico as having eight men -- as having made the progress it needs to, but there is room for cautious optimism about what mexico has done and what it can do in the future. >> that is assuming that mexico is a normal democracy. if mexico cannot pass reforms, it is because of divided government. i do not buy that. in a normal democracy, you do not have the sort of veto power that some can exercise over the

political process. >> it would be interesting to ask, this is more than that. >> would anybody trade in mexico of today for the mexico 15 years ago? >> without a doubt, no. whether people agree or disagree, what came out was very much a compromise, which goes to david's point.

>> with the issue diana brings up, it is a big issue, and the question is, where is u.s. policy here. depending on who you talk to, if he is playing to the center, this is a big issue for our domestic agenda, and it will be an issue for big changes, and unfortunately our policy and party seem unable to come together on little things, and frankly, a trucking should be a little thing. and let me say one more thing,

are there huge problems in mexico? yes. but if you look at what happened to the last years, where you almost needed a government job to be in mexico, that is no longer the case. we seem to have an income increase, and we have seen a diversity of getting to positions. one way of thinking about the middle class, we usually think about it in marxist terms. are you all worker or a capitalist. that is the way we think about it, and we put professionals in the middle. the middle class can be defined as consumers, and what we have seen in mexico and the last 15 yyars or 20 years is a huge explosion of consumption options, whether you like wal- mart or not, the fact you could buy lots of things at decent prices in mexico, you may not be

earning that much more, but your capacity to have a higher quality of life has increased significantly. and the last thing, when i go to mexico city or other cities, i see mexican debt optimist -- mexicans as optimists. there are a lot of one-story houses, but everybody has read bar for a second story. they put the wire up to be ready to do that. so the real question for calderon and the next president is, can they make the opportunity for mexicans to build that second floor? >> there's a lot more could carry on to this. hopefully you can stay around for a minute, but we told you we would and at 10:30. thank you for suggesting this. panel, thank you for coming, for

making a stopover, and david, for the wonderful time we have had here at the wilson center. thank you all for joining us, and a round of applause for our panel. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . .

>> good afternoon, everybody. i have been meeting with my cabinet and officials about efforts to stop the bp oil spill. i want to give the american people an update on these efforts. i also want to underscore the seriousness and urgency of this crisis. the potential devastation to the gulf coast, the economy and its people, requires us to continue our relentless efforts to stop the leak and contain the damage. there has already been a loss of life, and damage to our coastline, the fish, the wildlife, and the livelihoods of everyone from fishermen to hotel owners to restaurateurs. i have seen the frustration and anger myself, and it is an anger and frustration i share as president. i am not going to rest or be satisfied until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil in the gulf is cleaned up, and the people of the gulf are able

to go back to their lives and their livelihoods. the most important order of business is to stop the leak. i know there have been varying reports over the last couple of days about how large the leak is, but since no one can get down there in person, we know there is a level of uncertainty. our mobilization and response efforts have always been geared toward the possibility of a catastrophic event. what really matters is this, there is oil leaking and we need to stop it. we need to stop as soon as possible. with that source being 5,000 fteet under the ocean's surface, this has been extremely difficult. scientists and engineering experts are working to contain it as quickly as possible. our second task is to help the people who live in the gulf coast. we are using every available resource to stop the oil from

coming ashore. over 1 million ft. of barrier booms have been deployed to keep the oil back. hundreds of thousands of dispersants have been used to help break up the oil. about four million gallons of oil-free water have been -- oily water have been recovered. 30,000 people have been mobilized to protect the shoreline and its wildlife, as has a the national guard. this week, congress presented legislation to provide us with additional resources. these would mitigate the damage caused by this spill. i ask for prompt action on this legislation. it would help with cleanup effort, provide unemployment assistance and job training to folks whose jobs are affected by this crisis, and it would help the region's economic recovery. that is why this legislation is important. it would also help ensure that companies like bp who are responsible for oil spills are the ones who pay for the costs incurred by these oil spills,

not the taxpayers. this is in addition to the low interest loans that we have made available to small businesses that are suffering financial losses from the spill. let me also say, by the way, a word about bp and the other companies involved in this mess. i know bp has committed to pay for the response, and we will hold them to their obligation. i have to say though, i did not appreciate what i considered to be a ridiculous spectacle during the congressional hearings into this matter. the executives of bp, transocean, and halliburton were falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else. the american people could not have been impressed with that display, and i certainly was not. i understand that there are legal and financial issues involved, and a full investigation will tell us what happened. but it is very clear that the system failed and it failed badly. for that, there is enough

responsibility to go around, and all parties should be willing to accept it. that includes, by the way, the federal government. for too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agencies that permit them to drill. it seems as if permits were too often issued based on a little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. that cannot and will not happen anymore. to borrow an old phrase, we will trust, but we will verify. from the day he took office as interior secretary, ken salazar recognized these problems, and he has worked to solve them. oftentimes, he has been slammed by the industry for trying to create reforms that would impede them economically. well, as i just told him, we are going to keep on going, to do what needs to be done.

i have asked secretary salazar to conduct a top to bottom reform of the mineral management services. this week he announced that the part of the agency which permits oil and gas drilling will be separated from the part of the agency in charge of inspecting the safety of oil rigs and platforms and enforcing the law. that way there is no conflict of interest, real or perceived. he has also ordered immediate inspections of all deepwater operations in the gulf of mexico. no permits for drilling new wells will go forward until a 30-day safety and environmental review that i requested is completed. we are also closing the loophole that has allowed some oil companies to bypass critical environmental reviews. today, we are announcing a new examination of the environmental procedures for oil and gas development and exploration. as i said before, domestic oil

drilling continues to be one part of an overall energy strategy that now includes more clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency than at any other time in our history. but it is absolutely essential that, going forward, we put in place every necessary safeguard and protection so that a tragedy like this oil spill does not happen again. this is a responsibility that all of us share. the oil companies share it. the manufacturers of the equipment share it. the agencies at the federal government in charge of oversight share that responsibility. i will not tolerate more finger-pointing for irresponsibility. the people of the gulf coast need our help, and they deserve nothing less than for us to stand up and do whatever is necessary to stop this spill, prevent further damage, and compensate those who have been harmed already. that is our job. itis also our job to make sure that this kind of mess does not happen again.

it is the job we have been doing. it is the job we will continue doing until this bill is passed, the gulf is cleaned up, and everyone is compensated. thank you very much. >> what about solar panels at the white house? >> britain's new foreign minister, william hague, is in washington on his first overseas trip. he met with hillary clinton today. the held this joint press conference. it is 25 minutes. -- they held this joint press conference. it is 25 minutes. >> good afternoon. i am delighted to welcome foreign secretary william hague here to the state department on his first overseas trip in his new position. i was pleased to host him when

he was in his shadow staged some months ago -- stage some months ago. this is not the first time we have had the opportunity for a substantive discussion about a broad range of important matters. the election of a new government in the united kingdom and the smooth transfer of power this week or two powerful symbols of the enduring democratic traditions that our nation's share. we are very intrigued by and will follow closely the latest incarnation of this long, democratic tradition. we're reminded that our common values are the foundation of a historic alliance that really undergirds our common aspirations and concerns. the obama administration looks forward to working with the new british government. we will continue to build on the deep and abiding trust that as

us for aed between very long time. a foreign secretary and i have a lot to talk about today. we discussed are shared missions in afghanistan. he reaffirmed his government's commitment to working with the international community and the afghans to achieve long-term stability. united states is deeply appreciative of the british contributions in afghanistan. we honor the sacrifices of the british service members who served their country with such distinction overseas. the united states and united kingdom are also firmly committed to the nato mission in afghanistan. we support the efforts by the afghan government to fight corruption and build a stable and secure government and country. we will continue our very close consultations on these matters, going forward. we also remain united in our

insistence that it run fulfill its international obligations and prove that its nuclear -- i ran -- iran fulfill its international obligations and prove that its nuclear program is not dangeours. -- dangerous. their senior officials continued to say they will not talk about their nuclear program with us. we're working closely with our u.k. and other partners on a new security council resolution affirming that there are serious consequences should iran continue to flout its international obligations and failed to comply with iaea decisions and u.n.. security council n. the foreign secretary and by -- u.n. security council solutions. the foreign secretary and i will continue to work together to encourage all parties to resume

direct negotiations. we think it two-state solution to the israeli-palestinian conflict is the goal of securing a comprehensive peace in the middle east which requires everyone to be at the table. there are so many other issues that we touched upon. we share a mutual interest in restoring confidence in the financial sector in europe and 0 zone, as well as the global economy. we will continue to work to restore economic stability. i look forward to a strong working relationship with the foreign secretary. it is a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to begin what will be long, close, and at times intense conversations of the months and years ahead. >> thank you. it is an immense pleasure for me to be here today. i was here as a shadow foreign secretary seven months ago.

i always hoped we would have the opportunity to work together in the government and we now have that opportunity to do so. it has been an extraordinary week. it is only one week since the election vote came in. we have a new government created in a new way. one of the things that has struck the prime minister and i is the warmth we have had in our welcome in the united states. the first person to call me when i entered the foreign office was secretary clinton. vice president biden has had an excellent job on the telephone with the new deputy prime minister, nick clegg. one reason i wanted to come here and have our meeting is to show that we reciprocate that warmth and we're looking forward to the relationship which the secretary of state has been describing. this new british government has

some real ambition, energy, and determination to rebuild our economic strength at home, which is the foundation of any successful foreign policy, but also to deliver a distinctive british foreign policy abroad. i'm aware, coming into this job, of the challenges of foreign policy, which are uniquely tricky. i have always had huge admiration for secretary clinton and the leadership she has provided to the international community as secretary of state. her energy, ideas, advocacy of women's rights, education, development, effective diplomacy -- they are an inspiring example to other foreign ministers and would-be foreign ministers around the world. i pay tribute to her for that. we have very productive talks today that reflected a very wide agenda.

we work in partnership on those. we talked about our joint effort in afghanistan, which the prime minister has made our top priority. we will give the strategies -- the nato strategy and the agreements made at the london conference for time and support -- the time and support to succeed. we discussed the relationship in pakistan, where we share common goals and have started discussing ways to enhance and strengthen our cooperation in what we do. we discuss iran, where we agree on the need -- we discussed i ran, where we agree on the need to secure the passage of the un security council resolutions. we will play a key role in ensuring that there is action by

the european union to follow up such a resolution. we spoke about the middle east peace process, where i expressed my firm and full support for the efforts to relaunch negotiations. as a leading member of the eu, we want to buttress these efforts. we will work together on the crucial issue of a nuclear proliferation and the progress that we hope as been made in new york. we discussed developments in europe. i reiterate my determination that the european union should be a firm partner with the united states in meeting our shared at challenges, and the determination of the new british government to play a highly active and activist role in the european union from the very beginning. i want to say a few words about whats the about presidents have called a very extraordinary relationship between the united states and britain.

united states is the most important ally of the united kingdom. fundamentally, it is a relationship rooted in our strong national interests. the scope of our corporation is unparalleled -- our military, diplomats, -- the scope of our cooperation is unparalleled -- -- islitary, duiplomats unparalleled. we share common priorities to an extraordinary degree. we will continue to pursue these priorities. we can, please say there is an unbreakable alliance. -- we can confidently say there is an unbreakable alliance. thank you. >> [inaudible] >> madam secretary, you spent a

lot of time talking about afghanistan this week. forgive me if i switched the subject to iran. there has been a lot of violence in places which had been fairly quiet recently. is the administration concerned about this? how deeply are you concerned? how might it affect the timetable of the troop withdrawal? >> charlie, of course we are concerned any time there is the3 seen and loss of life and destruction that it has caused. we're not worried about the ability of that iraqi people and their institutions to work together to overcome the threat that the extremists are constantly presenting them with. in fact, we also have seen signs of outcry that in iraq becoming much less of a threat -- of al

qaeda in iraq becoming much less of a threat overall. the spate of recent bombings has certainly been heartbreaking for those who were affected. what is heartening to us is that the government and the people seem undeterred. there has not been a reaction that has pitted communities against each other. there have not been recriminations, even in this difficult period of government formation that is ongoing. overall, we are very convinced that iraq is certainly able to deal with these in both the military and police functions that are equally important in their political structures. we see nothing that would in any

way interfere with our timetable for withdrawal of american troops. >> foreign secretary, madam secretary, you talked about being intrigued by this new incarnation of democracy in britain. and as your two questions? -- can i ask you two questions? is there any party that is worried about possible fractures in the coalition government -- something very unusual in britain -- leading to a lack of stability in your relationship? on afghanistan, are you concerned that the surge is not delivering fast enough? president karzai is hardly delivering at all. >> on the first question on the answer is no.

i have no concerns whatsoever. we do not have a formally coalition government in the way that you have formed one in the u.k. now. we have enough of our own internal differences that we have to sort through. i see nothing at all unusual about this new government. from our perspective, it is off to a very strong start. on the foreign policy front, which i followed very closely obviously, we are extremely pleased. this meeting and discussion that was confirmed -- this meeting and discussion confirmed are close partnership and commitment to working together. afghanistan is one of those areas. i would beg to differ with the premise of the question. i think that the actions that our coalition forces -- the nato and i sat -- isaf forces are

proving to be effective. we conducted our own very thorough review when president obama took office. we made three conclusions. number one, what happened in afghanistan was critical to america's security interests. in our own home country and beyond, in the countries of our friends and allies like great britain. number two, the taliban had, after having been driven out of n, regained momentum. that momentum had to be broken. it was required -- more troops were required on the ground in order to achieve that objective. i am seeing signs of that. the third thing is -- there had to be a very close civilian military partnership -- a

civilian-military partnership, because you do not expect to win a counterinsurgency by military means alone. the military commanders who are in charge of this on our side, general petraeus, general mcchrystal, are taking the lessons they learned from iraq and applying them in afghanistan to good effect. we also know that we have to strengthen the capacity of the government of afghanistan. i would just add four context here -- for context, this country was so ravaged by war and the most intense conflict and depredations that destroyed so much of their history, other infrastructure, that it may seem like it is a long time to us, with our timeframes in the u.s. and u.k., but the k.plus --

eight plus years that have gone by since the rotting of the taliban have seen significant lives in -- routing of the taliban have seen significant improvement in the lives of that afghanistan people. -- in the lives of the afghanistan people. a number of his the ministers, many of whom were here to report on the progress they are making in this very critical areas like the economy, agriculture, health, education -- part of what we will begin with our counterparts, the foreign secretary, and others, is to work to review where we are, what more we need to do the, and how we can better coordinate our efforts. our military efforts are very well coordinated. on the other side we want to make sure -- on the the side, we want to make sure we're making

the best investments. -- on the other side, we want to make sure we are making the best investments. it is in our interests, or we would not be here. we're making progress. with a very clear understanding of how much more we and the afghans need to be doing -- we have a very clear understanding of how much more we and afghans need to do. -- we and the afghans need to do. >> how can we best do that? we need to enhance and reinforce the cooperation between the united kingdom and united states at the highest levels, so that we of a clear perspective on what we're doing. on the question about the nature of the new government in britain, i think it is very important for our partners and friends around the world to know that what we've set out to achieve is a particularly stable period in british politics and government.

we have come together in the national interest, ahead of the party interests. we of created a sizable majority in the house of commons -- we have created a sizable majority in the house of commons. that has been strongly welcomed around the world. it does mean stability in britain so that we can pursue the kind of objectives we have been talking about. everything i said today about our approach to relations with the united states is an approach shared by the whole cabinet. i am speaking on behalf of the united government. >> [inaudible] secretary clinton you spoke to -- secretary clinton, you spoke to a chinese secretary on tuesday night. did that conversation bring you materially closer to consensus on an iran resolution?

it seems inevitable that the iranians will try to use this weekend's visit to try to blunt the momentum toward additional sanctions at the used -- at the st. john -- toward additional sanctions at the council. what have you told anyone in your conversations to try to prevent that? >> first, i did have a very lengthy and substantive conversation with that stain counselor. we covered -- state councilor. we covered a lot of the issues that were pursued in new york. we are making progress every day. this is the highest priority of the united states and of many of our partners and allies, like the u.k. we believe that the cases being made, perhaps -- we believe that the case is being made, perhaps

most effectively by the iranian s themselves. they began pointing out that the iranians were not responding to our offers of engagement, including the offer that was made for the reactor approach. there had been no meetings since the meeting in geneva in october. the iranians unilaterally said they would start enriching at 20% when the undisclosed facility was revealed. the iaea, under the director, issued its report. every step along the way has demonstrated clearly to the ira then -- to the world that iran is not participating in the the national arena in the way we

asked them to do. they continue to pursue their nuclear program. we are aware that there will be a meeting in iran. i spoke at length to the brazilian foreign minister. significantly, the interchange between president medvedev and one of his counterparts illustrated that the brazilians are attempting to climb this hill. the brazilians are still hopeful that because of the visit, the iranians will agree to meet with them and accept the tehran research reactor proposal. they hope it will begin to abide by their international obligations. they told her in the context of the visit that they had less than a 1 in 3 chance.

it has moved in the same direction. some have moved more quickly than others. it is in the direction of%+ reforming the 30 -- reforming -- reaffirming the security council and uniting the world in a way that sends an unequivocal message to the iranian leadership. i have told my counterparts in many capitals around the world that i believe that we will not get any serious response out of the iranians until after the security council acts. >> [inaudible] >> there have been several foreign secretaries under the previous government who discussed the iran issue. what do you think you can bring to this subject that might be different from the approach of past secretaries? when do you think we might get

to the stage where some sort of strike will be discussed? >> i am not looking for differences from previous british and ministrations. we support the effort of the outgoing labor government -- labour government. there'll be a strong continuity on british policy on this matter. i fully endorse everything that secretary clinton has just said about it. the united kingdom will work solidly alongside the united states to secure the security council resolutions. we will play that role within the european union that i spoke of before. we'll do everything we can as a new government in britain to persuade our partners in europe that it will be necessary to show europe's determination to take some similar -- many similar steps to those taken by the united states to intensify

the peaceful pressure on iran. i have long advocated that the european union should adopt financial sections every time the united states has implemented them on this issue. we'll have to get into the specifics once the security council resolution has passed. there is no magic to this approach. it requires persistence and determination. it requires united strength in the international community to tackle this problem. we will buttress that, as indeed our predecessors have tried to do. we are not calling and we have never ruled out supporting military action, though we are not calling for it. it is because we want to see this matter settled peacefully and rapidly that we call for sanctions and support the idea of the security council resolutions. that is our perspective.

>> thank you. >> thank you very much indeed. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> sarah palin talks to a meeting of the susan b. anthony list in washington. the head of the u.s. chamber of commerce is at the national press club. later, space shuttle atlantis begins its final mission. on tomorrow's "washington journal," we will discuss the gulf war oil spill -- the gulf oil spill. we will take a look at the new coalition government in britain. and an arizona state representative will discuss her

state's new immigration enforcement law. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c- span. >> sunday, and new prime minister david cameron and deputy prime minister nick clegg at their first news conference since forming a coalition government. there will be remarks from outgoing prime minister gordon brown as he left number 10 downing street. that is sunday night at 9:00 p.m. on c-span. >> watched the hearings on the gulf of mexico oil spill or look back at the exxon valdez hearings from 1989 at the new c- span video library. we have over 160,000 hours of searchable programming. it is washington your way. every program since 1987 is available free online. >> former alaska governor and vice presidential candidate sarah palin was in washington today to talk to the susan b. anthony list.

they are group that supports anti-abortion political candidates. governor palin is introduced by the susan b. anthony list's general chairman. this is 45 minutes. [applause] >> it good morning. i am chain abraham, general chairman of the susan b. anthony list. i chair our candidate selection list. it is good to see so many old and new friends. i want to thank you for your commitment to this noblest of causes -- protecting the sanctity of life. here in washington, we have a lot of issues that come and go. some come around every year during the budget fight and some come around when a crisis occurs. some come around because the press needs to fill their new cycle. fighting to protect the unborn is not one of those issues. we do not just fight for life on mondays or every march or when

the cameras are on, or when we have a little extra time, ours is a 24/7 mission. it is a cause that we will fight for every day, every hour, every minute, until every baby in our great country comes to term and enjoys god's blessings of life without the threat that some abortionist will terminate at life prior to birth. [applause] that is what we are here for. that mission is one that we will all embrace until it is accomplished. the susan b. anthony list exists to help elect pro-life officials to office. we try to provide support to pro-life women, because there simply are not enough elected women in federal office who are pro-life. [applause] we strongly believe that our cause is strengthened when a pro-life woman stands up against

barbara boxer or nancy pelosi and goes toe to toe with them on this issue. thank you, michele bachmann, and our other pro-life elected officials, for your effective advocacy. [applause] when we began, there were not many, but we had hopes and dreams -- the dream to add more pro-life women to the house. a dream that we accomplished. the dream to elect a pro-life woman to the senate -- a dream that we accomplished with the election of elizabeth dolan. we are going to go a lot further this year. we're going to elect a pro-life woman from colorado to the u.s. senate. [applause] we're going to elect a pro-life woman from the bad debt to replace harry reid -- from the

bad debt to replace harry reid. we will select a pro-life woman from california to replace barbara boxer. [applause] and we have another we had another dream. thanks to our guest speaker, that far-fetched dream became a reality in 2008. [applause] when sarah palin was nominated for vice president, we were overwhelmed with excitement from our members. within weeks, we had 77,000 new recruits who joined our team sarah oject to work to help elect senator mccain and governor palin. most importantly, we had a champion on the national stage

whose passi for and commitment to our cause of life gave incredible momentum to this cause. what makes govnor palin so important to the cause of life and to so many other issues is her character and courage. the mainstream media and the left have taken their best shots month after month to bring her down. no attack was toocheap. no topic too personal, no family member too young or vulnerable to be spar. had any of these assaults been leveled against the average politician, they would have buckled. some would have begun trimming and hedging and compromising their positions, but not sarah palin. others especially those on the left would have cried foul and had the entire mainstream media demandingpologiesalling for resignations threatening sponsors of cable news networks or whatever else it it took to stop the onslaught.

but not sarah palin. sarah palin is not the typical politician. she is a woman of cragend character. she took all theirttacks and never changed her views on an issue. instead, she stood up to her adversaries and said, bring it on. governor sarah palin more than any single figure on the national stage today has proven what toughness and conviction is all about. toughness and conviction is not pushing through an unpopular health care bill that will fund abortions with all the money t interest groups and national press corps on on your side. toughness and conviction is not spending our grandchildren's legacy to bankroll favored industries and friends with government handouts in the name of economic growth. toughness and conviction is not launching round after round of talks and negotiations when adversaries are building nuclear

arsenals designed to threaten america's security. toughness and conviction is withstanding the unrelenting attacks of the mainstream media, the left wing interest groups, the late night comics, the democrat establishment and the president of the united states and holding one's ground. continuing to fight for one's principles and not backing down one inch. and that is what sarah palin has done in the battle for life and the battle to protect the economic and national security of the united states of america. [ applause ] and that's why so many amecans love sarah palin. and we in the pro-life community especially admire sarah palin. we do so because of her unequivocal commitment to pro-life policies. we do so because of her willingness to help pro-life causes across america, and we do so because she has shown in h

own experience that every human life is beautiful and special and deserving of the protection that we are fighting to provide. over the next few years the future of the pro-life movement will be deeply shaped by who wins and who loses some extremely critical elections. those campans will determine who sits in the white house, who controls congress and most importantly who fills the swing votes on the supreme court. for us to prevail it is essential we have the support and manpower to wage the kind of aggressiveampan needed to overcome the advantages the pro-abortion side enjoys. and thanks to the help of sarah palin today, we will have more of those resources and support as we go forward. on final point, as many of you know my husband and i have been in the political arena for 30 years fighting for life and other issues of importance to us. we know more than most what it's like to be part of these battles

and what it means to families and friendships and futures. and i just want to finish my inrowduction today by thanking governor palin and her family for being willing to do what they have done for these causes we care so much about. you have given all of us more courage to keep fighting. you have set an incredible example for people like my twin 16-year-old daughters who need to see strong re models like you fight for what is right. and you have proven that in a profession that is all too often judged by who is up and who's done, not who's right and who's wrong there remains a place for people of faith and fortitude to stand tall and lead america in the right direction. and we know you will keep leading these efforts as we enter this crucial point in america's experice. for all this, i just want to offer my sincerest thanks to

you, governor palin, thanks for what you've done. thank you for being here toelp us today and thank you for what i know will be your unrelenting commitment to the struggle ahead. and now, ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming our guest speaker, governor sarah palin. [ apause ] >> thank you so much. thank you very much. thank you, sisters. thank you. it is great to be here and i appreciate that warm welcome. thank you. thank you. oh, thank you. god bless you. oh, i appreciate so much that warm welcome. thank you all. it is great to be here. good morning, sisters and i see

some brothers out there o. glad you made it. first i'd like to thank jane and marjorie for their wonderful work and for their boldness, their courage, they're not backing down when they tak heat. sometimes i know if my name is associated with something, you take a little bit of extra heat. i appreciate so much thatou take it anyway and thank you, emily, buchanan, r all of your hard work with this organization and marie, the most beautiful song, that was gorgeous. thank you so much for your talent sharing that. and then the founders and the members of team sarah who are here, i can't tell you how much i appreciate you and i would ask that you would stand up so that i can put some faces out there to names and i thank you so much. [ applause ] thank you. woo, talk about courage and boldness, you all. thank you for the great work you did in '08 during the campaign and since then even continuing to support and advocate for good

commonsense solutions and helping me get the message out there. i appciate you so much. you know what i would always like to do when i'm in any kind of group is acknowledge those who allow us to be here free and secure, the members of our united states military. i know we have a lot of spouses of military members and moms of military members and daughters too. those of you who are serving today in uniform or perhaps have served in the past, our veteran, you are who we want to thank and salute and i would ask that members of our military past or present would stand up. we will thank you, salute you anday godless you. [ applause ] thank you. thank you. america's finest. our men and women in uniform who are a force for good throughout the world and there is nothing to apologize for that. god bless you, veterans.

thank you. and we do have these good candidates. i though this they have been listed today, robin smith and pam bondi and jane norton and kel i aot. so happy you're here andutting it on the line. i thank you for the courage you're showing in running for office. this afternoon, i'll be with nikki haley in south carolina doing an endorsement tre and, of course, carly fiorina, it was, you know, the credibility there that sba aows a candidate to have knowing that, oh, okay, i'm safe, they're endorsin carly fiorina. you all have endorsedher. you all get it. you understand that they're in deep blue california. anyone who is running for office bold enough to declare their pro-life stance, they're pro-nra and pro-business and anti-big government principles that they

stand on here she proudly proclaiming that yet some wanting too ause her of being a rhino. no, no, no, they'ren the deep blue california. if she's unabashedly pro-life and all those other commonsense conservative things she stands for, she's the real deal and i appreciate you too being bold enough and strong enough to take a stand in that race and take a stand in so many races across the country. i'm especially glad to be celebrating life. it's an honor to speak in a building named after one of my roes and one of your, ronald reagan. this is an honor. president reagan was always so supportive of women adership. in fact, he often liked to tell a story about his good friend and another hero, margaret

thatcher he first met her before she became prime minter and it was a trip he took to england while governor of cale. reagan loved to tell a story about that trip. apparently he was the guest at a reception hosted by members of the british conservative party. and reagan's own words, he said, lord, somebody or other come over to h and asked, well, what do you think of our mrs. thatcher and reagan said, i think she'd make a magnificent prime minister and the british lord said, oh, my dear fellow, a woman prime minister? and reagan replied, well, you had a queen named victoria who did pretty well. and, of course, reagan was right about what a magnificent prime minister margaret thatcher was and i admire the fact that mrs. thatcher never set out to be a woman prime minister, just a prime minister and one of the greatest ever to have served perhaps because she was a woman of action.

thatcher liked to say in politics, you want something id, ask a man. you want something done, ask a woman. that was her quote. so, folks, in 2010 we'll remember this year because we're going to accomplish a lot together this year. this year will be remembered a a year when commonsense conservative women get things done for our country. [ applause ] all across this country women are standing up and speaking out for commonsense solutions and many of them are grassroots activists leading like the tea party movement which i'm excited about because it's a beautiful movement. it's a movement of the people. these women are getting involved because ty want a better futu for their kids. pore all of our kids and these policies coming out of d. right now, this fundamental transformation of america that we were warned about in the campaign, well, a lot of women

who are very concerned about their kids' future saying we don't like this fundamental tra transformation of amica. this road we're on towards national insolvency. we being beholden to foreign countries in so many respects now. we being under the tmb of big government with more of a disrespect for life, for the sapt hit of life. we don't like that transformation and to me it seems like it's kind of a mom awakening in the last year and a half whereomen are rising up and saying, no, we've had enoug already, we're going to turn this thing around. we're going to get our country back on the right track no matter what takes. we're putting all our efforts into the midterm elections to turn things around and put government back on our side, to respect the will of the people. not allowing government to make us work for it, but for our government to again work f us. the policies coming out of d.c. -- [ applause ]

-- are allowing us to feel empowered really. allowing us to rise up together because moms kind of just know when something is wrong. it's tt mother's intuition thing i think. we can tell when things are off base, off course or not right and we're not afraid to roll up our sleeves and get to work and get the job done, set things straight. poms can be counted on to fight for their children's future. now, again, part of that fight s to do with the grassroots movement that is full of tea party americans, those who are saying, no, enough is enough. and what has amazed me about the tea party movement is how the media has reacted to the people who are involved in -- just want their voice heard and saying, no, government, you're overreaching. you need to abide by our constitutionnd you have limited powers, federal government, and we're going to kind of explain to you and remind you what the constitution is all about. that's what the tea party movement is all about. so they're the media and they

crack me up because they embed themselves in the tea party rallies and they try to figure out just who are these creatures who are a part of this, these moms, these grandmas, these teens and college students, these doctors and daughtlawyers such. people of all races being a part of this movement and, yet, the media has tried but i think they've failed because americans are smart enough to start holding the media accountable, but people there in the media trying to portray tea party americans as racists and violent and all those things that they are not, that we are not. just average every day hard-working patriotic liberty-loving americans who again have said, that's enough, federal government. that's enough of your overreach and we're going to do something abt it. now, it's been clever too being a part of these tea party rallies, seeing some of the

signs in the aurd jens and some of your sig today too. you can learn a whole lot about what the sentiment is out there in the american public just by reading the signs and in some of these movements. i thk one of my favorite was a mom carry agent sign saying "my kid is not your atm." i d like that billboard too, though. that billboard that the college kids have up that was just recently unveiled, it says "mr. president, i need a frickin job, period. that was a good one in buffalo. oh, of course, i always like seei though too the sign of the billboard george bush saying, miss me yet? i love that one. we do because when washington goes on a spending spree and starts borrowing money to take over and bail out insurance companies and financial institutions and the banks, the

automakers and keepspending endlessly and running up dangerously unsustainable debt and deficits and expected our kids and grandkids will pay the bills for us for our overspendingtoday, i think that's immoral. it's unethical, it's not right and i think that all of us agree on that and when that happens, i think a whole lot of moms who ar concerned abo government handing our kids the bill, this generational theft too we're stealing opportunities from the future of america, we rise up and moms say,ome on now, that's enough. that is enough. and we're going to do something about this. and washington, let me tell you, yo no doubt don't want to mess with moms who are rising up, they're in alask i always think of the mama grizzly bears that ride up on their hind legs when somebody is a coming to attack their cub, to do something adverse to their cub, no, the momma grizzlies rear up.

if you thought pit bulls were tough, you don't want to mess with the mama grizzlies. i think already a whole of those in this om. [ applause ] >> that's why we're seeing with all these women banding together rising up saying, no, this isn't right forrous kids and for our grandkids. and women leading the grassroots people's movement, many of the tea party leaders, most of them are women. so some commonsense constitutional conservative women taking to the streets right now, organizing on that grasoots level. this is so good for our republic. it's so good fora republic within a democracy to have this -- have this rising up, this awakening, it's very, very healthy for our republic. others are putting it all on the line, as i say, running f office, being so bold and those who are endorsed and nurtured by the susan b. anthony list, we so appreciate you. when i see how many great women candidates arerunning, kind of reminds me of that campaign

button that we had in 2008. it showed a pink gop elephant on it and it said "it's a girl." maybe that was a single girl reference then but this year look out, washington, because there's a whole stampede of pink elephants crossing the line and the eta stampeding through, the eta is november 2nd, 2010. [ applause ] a lot of women coming together to take that country back. organizations like the susan b. anthony list are leading the charge too thankfully. you play such a crucial and unique role in the pro-family, pro-woman, pro-life movement because you support pro-life women candidates. and that is a group that must continue to grow in numbers. you sponsor candidates who will not vote present on those issues of life, and your support for the culture of life, you know that it's not above anybody's

pay grade. we proudly stand up and we speak out for those most in need of our protection. those most vulnerable. and we're not shy about doing so. and being a pro-life politician is more than just a convenient title come election time. it means making tough decisions, even i that means bucking your party once in a while on these issues of life. even if it means standing up against that machine that's running a party. the susan b. anthony list was front and center during the obama care debate and we were also grateful for your leadership in typing the private funning in the bill during the obama care debate. we were saddened to see so many so-called pro-life democrats cave on the issue though but we're not discouged. far from being discouraged we need to be energized. we need to be really fired up and not be demoralized but get organized.

elections have consequences. and we've seen some of the man necessarytations of that already in the recent elections and in some of the recent polls we've seen the consequences of those who said that they were we will not forget those who promise to hold firm, but caved at the last minute, in exchange for an on-line executive order, promised by the most pro- abortion president to ever occupy the white house. we will not forget. we will not forget come november. our new pro-life, pro-woman majority will actually be pro- life when it counts -- when the votes are needed. [applause] your work is more than just candidates. you act as a representative for all feminists who believe in the culture of life, organizations like the susan b. anthony list

are returning the woman's movement back to its original routes, back to what it was all about in the beginning. you remind us that the earliest leaders of the movement were pro-life, women like your namesake and like elizabeth cady stanton. there was the author of the original equal rights amendment back in 1923 who said abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women. today, polls show that more young women agree with these than ever before and believe in the culture of life, empowering women by offering them are real choice. the gallup poll showed that for the first time in 14 years, there are more americans proudly proclaiming themselves as pro- life, understanding the sanctity of life, than ever before. .

[ applause ] today they're telling them they're strong enough and capable enough to handle an unintended pregnancy and still be able in less thandeal circumstances no doubt but still be able to handle that give their child life, in addition to pursui career and pursuing education, pursuing avocations. though society wants to tell these young women otherwise. even these feminist groups want to try to tell women, send this message that, no, you're not capable of doing both. you can't giv your child life and still pursue career or education. you're not strong muff. you're not capable so that's very, very hypocritical of some of those pro-life groups -- i mean pro-wonights groups out there who would claim suc a thing and that's as opposed again to susan b. anthony list,

another pro-life women's group saying no, no, women, you are strong muffnd if motherhood isn't an option, raising that child after you allow it life, well, then adoption is a beautiful choice a we need to pursue more opportunity in that arena. [ applause ] so even in less than ideal circumstances, these pro-life groups are empowering women, letting them understand that, yeah, there's going to be some help and some support and resources out thereor you in order to giv your child life. and i understand those challenges in less than ideal circumstances. i've been there. you know, i had never ordered up, planned on being the pom of son with special needs, you know, i thought, ooh, you know, god will never give me something that i can't handle and wn i found out at about 12 weeks along through an ultrasound that

my baby would be born with down ndrome, i thought immediately, okay, god, remember, you promised this, you will ner give us anything that we can't handle. i don't think i can handle this. this wasn't part of my life's plan. had no idea how i was going to handle the situation in raising a special needs child as a very busy governor, busy with four other kids, husband away quite often, commercial fishinging and up on the north slope in the oil fields working there and just, you know, the circumstances not -- and not knowing if my heart was ready, not knowing if i was patient and nir turing enough. my sister has a child with autism and we've always said, see, god knew what he was dog, the autistic child would be for heather my sister heather because she is the more nurturing one. she'd be able to handle this but when trig was born then, i understood then that, no, god knows what he's doing and what

seemed like -- what would be such a challenge has turned into our greatest blessing. and i believe that one of the whispers in my ear during -- after that ultra sound and the weeks of the pregnancy, the months of the pregnancy was, god kind of whispering in my ear saying, are you going to trust me? and, are you going to walk the walk or are you just going to talk the talk? and he so prepared my heart though i didn't know preparation wasven being done in our family and in my heart but the minute that trig was born and they lay him in my arms and he just kind of melted right on into my chest and looks up at me and it was just like he is saying, see, god knows what he's doing and this is going to be good and, mom, he gave me to you and he gave you to me and this is going to be -- ts is going to be a wonderful journey and truly god is so overwheing us with joy and the recognition of his perfection,trig's

perfection has been nothing but blessing and i so want to help other women who are in that situation thinking these are less than ideal circumstances. what am i going to do about this? maybe i can change those circumstances? maybe this can all just go away and we'll pretend it never happened. i want to encourage these women, oh, my goodness, give this life a chance. you will be blown away, overwhelmed. your life will so change for the better in allowing the life of someone even with special needs, especially someone with special needs. todd and i know know in our family trig will teach us more than we'll ever be able to teach him. he allows such awesome perspective on what really matters and i think too in this political arena is, oh, all the stuff on the periphery that just wastes time, doesn't matter. at the end of the day the things that are maybe said in the political and political pot s t shots, they don't amount to a

hill of beans when trig is there showing us this golden heart that i believe god would want all of us to embrace and to emulate with a child with ecial needs, i tell you tru trig has been the best thing that has ever happened to me and to the palin family. yes. [ applause ] >> bless you. thank you. thank you very much. let me share quickly that tg does tt the rest of us can learn from. he, of course, having challenges and loved challenges his entire life,robably greater challengeshan the rest of us. trig, you can already see this

sort of perspective in this child that i think the rest of us are supposed to understand and emulate too. trig in the morning he'll wake up, he's 2 years old now. he pulls himself up to the top of the crib there, he looks around and rubs his sleepy little eyes and even though the day i going to be challenging, he starts applauding, first thing in the morning. leeing around clapping like, woo-hoo. what are you going to do now? i'm like, man, shouldn't we all -- shouldn't we all? that's what we're learning from our boy. but my daughter bristol to she didn't expect to become pregnant at 17 and those were less than ideal circumstance there bristol having to endure some public humiliation. it was an embarrassing time for her and bless her heart. they are out on the national stage and she and the rest of the family saying this wasn't supposed to happen.

no, you don't -- you don't think that it ll happen in your own family and bristol though being so strong and independent and knowing what choosing life was the right road, the right choice, she kw it wouldn't be easy and it hasn't been easy, and sociy, culture sure hasn't made it easy on her, and her message now being, hey, other teenage girls, don't do what i di this is not easy. you know, it was a premature ending of her adolescence and it was -- you know, the beginning of a whole new life, absolutely living now for someone else. she is living for her son. but, wow, our culture and the media has made it rough on her and they're kind of sending a message i think to other girls that, hey, it probably would be easier if you just abort your child and not have to go through what bristol is going through but bristol too is saying, no, these are less than idea

circumstances, her message now is don't do what i did. abstinence is the only 100% foolproof way, of course, of preventing pregnancy. she though is getting clobbered for that message and she's kind of new to all of this too obviously and she's like, why would i get clobbered out there in our society for using myself as a lesson is what she's saying and just, you know, warning other teenagers i think the phrase she uses is pause before you play, which is that's good for them too. but bristol knowing too that it was the right choice and she now seen and the rest of us seeing that there again what seemed like life's greatest challenge and an impossible situation to get through right out of the chute when you hear the news, no, her baby having turned into such an awesome blessing and we here at the -- a year and a half

later looking at this child saying what would our life be like if he were not here in our life? again, n an easyoad for bristol, not an easy roa but the right road and aim very proud of her cision. it's important to know that i am and always have been unapologetically pro-life so when i talk about trig and i talk tother groups about what kind of went through my mind and the feelings that i had when the doctor was telling me about what could be the results of the tests with the down syndrome tests and all that, i have to be really careful in how i explain my feelings, because some people say, oh, you know, she considered abortion or she, you know, how can that validate her pro-life position and i say, no, what bristol and i both have been through has nothanged that belief, but i has changed my perspective on the whole situation. our experiences gave me tremendous empathy for the woman

who does find herself in less than ideal circumstances. i now understand why a woman would be tempted perhaps to think that, well, it might just be an easier way out to try to changehe circumstances, to take the situation in my own hands and change this. i understand what goes through other mind even for a brief moment a split second because what i've been lew but what my family experienced through the last few years reaffirmed and strengthened my unweavering support for life at every stage and choosing life may not be the easiest path but it's always the right path. [ applause ] and i've had that confirmation. the timing of the circumstances may not be perfect, but god sees a way where he cannot and doesn't make mistakes so bristol and i both putting that faith in that belief and learning what are life's greatest challenges turn out to be life's greatest

blessings and though it took me time to get my arms around being the mom of a special needs child, as i say, the moment that trig was born, it was truly the happiestoment of my life and things came together for me then. it was life-changing and truly teaching us more than we'll ever be able to teach him so i think the sba list for allowing women to receive that message about the sanctity of life,bout giving life a chance and being a pro-life, pro-woman organization that has this growing voice because morend more americans are looking to the sba. they're looking to see who it is you endorse. they're looking to see what the message is coming from the sba because there's a craving, there's a yearning out there in our society out there in a culture for truth. and for people who are those with that stiff spine and won't shy away from talking about the issues that some want to kind of

consider off base or too controversial or too politically correct and don't want to engage in the conversation about the sanctity of life. sba is bold enough, courageous enough to empower other women to have the stiff spine and awk about those other issues and i think the list too for being a home to a mu conservative feminist movement is how i look at this. it's an emerging conservative feministentity. far too long when people heard the word feminist they thought of theaculty lounge at some east coast women's college, right? and no offense to them, they have their opinions and their voice and god bless them. they're just great, but that's not the oy voice of women in america. i'd like to remind people of another feminist tradition. kind of a western feminism. it's influenced by the pioneering spirit of our pr formothers who went in wagon trains across the wilderness and they settled in homesteads and

these were tough, independent, pioneering mothers whose work was as valuable as any man's on the frontier and it's no surprise that our western states that gave women the vote, the right to vote way before their east coast sisters in a more general till city perhaps got it right. these women had dirt under their fingernails and could shoot a gun and push a plownd raise a family all at the same time. these women are frontier foremothers, they loved this country and they made sacrifices to carve out a living and a family life out of the wilderness. they went where no woman had gone before. i kind of feel a connection to that tough gun-toting pioneer feminism of women like annie oakley and them. [ applause ] maybe it's that i'm bringing in alaska, maybe too it's because later on today i do a speech for the nra and again in the group, yeah.

i'm proud to call melf a western conservative in the tradition of ronald reagan. ronald reagan -- [ applause ] -- understanding those western values too. those small town values and as an alaskan woman i'm proud to considered myself a frontier fp nis like the early women of the west. now, maybe my jumping on a national stage was a bit of a shock to some people. some people may notav an indepe pioneering spirit -- how i was brought up with, what that could look like. maybe there was a lot of shock out there jumping on that national stage, but i know that some left wing feminists, they sure didn't know what to make of an alaskan chick out there talking about theecond amendment and talking about raising family a kids, the more the merrier and, you know, well, some of them even refused to admit i was even a woman, geez.

that's one of the reasons why i'm so grateful for the support of this organization. oh, my goodness. the hard work, the graciousness. even the diplomacy, how you're able to engage in the issues, in the debate with healthy debate, so diplomatically, so professionally with so much wisd and intelligence and, again, with grace. i'm grateful to have a place like this full of sisters who are not put off by a gun-toting pro-life mom of a fun, full family, never dull and i so appreciate the support that you all have shown. so our work gether, together with susan b. anthony is torow and expand this organization so that it too will be a foundation in our work to build a culture of life because america's going to be an evenore exceptional place as that cture of life is embraced and as we make

manifests the efforts in our intentions and our commitment to kind of open the eyes of others to let them see that importance of protecting life,eally it all comes down to life and how we're going to take a stand on protecting innocent life and deding, you know, that nobody is beneath the protection of our laws. a better america in this most exceptional country still we're going to be able to do it better. we're going to be even more exceptional with that culture of life being ushered . it too must be a foundation for a new revival of that original feminism of susan b. anthony. together we're showing young women that being pro-life is in keeping with the best traditions of the woman's movement and this year the susan b. anthony list and its great women candidates are going to prove margaret thatcher right. if you want something done, ask a woman. we're getting the job done,

sisters, one life, one activist, one election, one vote, one american dream at a te so thank you, keep up the good  work. god bless you. god bless the united ates of america. thank you, guys. thank you, guys.

thank you for coming. go to work. [applause] "book tv" features 48 hours of nonfiction books. john kiriakou is "the reluctance by." . find the entire schedule at booktv.org. >> our public affairs content is available on tv, radio, and

online. sign up for our scheduled alert e-mails @ c-span.org. the men of the u.s. chamber of commerce talked about -- chairman of the u.s. chamber of commerce talked in washington. this is one hour. >> good afternoon and welcome. i am a reporter for "bloomberg is." with the world's leading professional organization for journalists and by fostering a free press and worldwide. for more information, please visit our web site. to donate, please visit press.org/library.

i would like to welcome our speaker and our attendees at today's event which includes guest of our speaker as well as working journalists. i would like to welcome our c- span and public radio audiences. after the speech concludes, i will ask as many audience questions as time permits. i would like to introduce to you our head table guests. from your right, william cassidy. frank masano, annthony morena. liz riley, director of the program and a guest of our speaker. the senior business editor for national public radio. john murphy, vice president of international affairs for the u.s. chamber of commerce. turning over the podium, andrew

schneider. skipping over our speaker, joe winsky. laura bachman. michaelle hirsh. and a broadcast journalist with aahn tv. thank you. [applause] >> the u.s. chamber of commerce has occupied one of the most enviable physical locations in washington. at 1615 h st. nw, the chamber's headquarters stands directly across lafayette park from the white house. no president can look out his

front window without it commanding his attention. the relationship of these neighbors may be described as < harmonious since the current occupant -- less than harmonious since the current occupant moved in. they have found common ground to promote growth. two weeks before he delivered his state of the union address, our speaker delivered his address on the state of business. both called for the doubling of u.s. exports. able to target. factoring out inflation, the last time american exports expanded that quickly was will war ii. no one has ever accused our guest of lacking vision. thomas donahue to over in september 1970 after 13 years as head of the american trucking associations. the chamber was suffering from defections in the aftermath of

partial support of the clinton health-care plan. the chamber can once again claim the mantle of the world's largest business federation with all the political clout that measure entails. please welcome to the national press club, tom donahue. [applause] >> thank you. i am pleased to be here. a special thanks to our friends that we were able to course to join us for this event. -- coerce to join us for this event. the greatest priority for the country today is creating jobs. the unemployment rate is 9.9%. it soars beyond 17% when you count those who have stopped looking for work and the underemployed.

we have lost roughly 8 million jobs in the last two years. by that chambers estimate, we need to create 20 million jobs in the next decade to replace those lost during the recession and to keep up with the growing population. although we have created 145,000 jobs per month on average, this year, it is not near enough. under the circumstances, world trade month is a perfect time to point out that expanding american exports makes more sense than ever. unlike past recoveries, we cannot simply rely on domestic consumption. american consumers are tapped out in some ways and the u.s. government, some would argue, are maxed out. so if domestic demand is weak, and the government's ability to stimulate the economy minimized, who will buy our

products and services? where will demand come from? the answer, the rest of the world. 95% of the world's consumers, 87% of its economic growth, and 73% of its purchasing power resides outside the united states. last september, the chamber said a national goal of doubling u.s. exports in the next five years and doubling began. if we succeed, this would put us well along the way to creating those 20 million jobs. we're pleased that president obama echoed that goal and stated -- in the state of the union message. what is standing in the way. -- what is standing in the way of achieving our shared goal? look abroad and here in washington for the answers. countries all over the world continue to raise protectionist

barriers to tilt the playing field in their advantage, to favor domestic industries, and keep their markets closed. nothing new. this happens in every recession. here at home, a u.s. trade policies seems stuck in a state of suspended animation. it has been a lot of great talk but precious little action. what does all this mean as we attempt to assess the state of the world trade system today? on one hand, there is plenty of trading today. after a sharp decline during the financial crisis, global commerce is now recovering. yet, that is only part of the picture. the rest of the picture is not so attractive. in fact, if i had to describe the state of the world trade today, i would do so in two

words. missed opportunities. missed opportunities to create new jobs, to lift millions out of poverty, to raise the global standard of living and to bring people and nations closer together. the good news is we have the capacity to recapture these opportunities and unleash a new wave of growth, progress, and prosperity here in home and across the globe. we must begin with the reality that global markets are not as open to american products and services as we are to theirs. the playing field is not level. in fact, since the financial crisis, the playing field has become even more unlevel. we are aware that the wto has found that new protectionist measures enacted since the financial crisis, began to cover

just 1% of the world's merchandise trade. it has done little to gauge the impact of the behind the border measures that countries around the world are deploying at an alarming rate. there are the visible obstructions to trade and the quiet, hidden ones. at the forefront of concern is the resurgent of -- resurgence of state-owned enterprises which are bestowed with preferential treatment that puts foreign enterprises at a disadvantage. china is using industrial policies and an array of regulatory tools to foster a national champions and to promote the transfer of technology and innovative capacity to their country. the case in point. china's so-called indigenous innovation strategy. i will be going to china next

week. to meet with the leaders and address are growing concerns of our members on issues ranging from innovation, per kermit, i.t., and currency. -- procurement, i.t., and currency. . .

how did brazil respond to its new, large, offshore oil find? by laying plans for new state- owned companies to control it. in this anti-trust demeanor, some nations, and the building, manipulating their policies, keep competitors out, not playing according to the rules. there is an ongoing assault against intellectual property around the world. in addition to criminal enterprises, i.t. is also under threat by some garments that promotes the view that i.t. rights are an obstacle, rather than a catalyst to economic development and growth.

the united states must continue to work with like-minded nations to raise standards for the production of i.t. -- ip by a greeting and anti -- by creating a robust agreement this year. the obstacles facing in their best -- the obstacles facing exporters raises a critical question. how should we, as a nation and the business community respond -- and a business community, respond? let me start by stating how we must not respond. we must not respond to closing our own markets. there is too much at stake and it will not work. even with all of the obstacles, the united states is still the world's largest exporter of goods and services. one in four factory jobs depends on exports.

one in 3 acres of planted plant in this country is for hungry consumers abroad. more than 5 million american jobs are supported by foreign direct investment. an example of one way not to respond was the by american -- buy america provision from the recovery act. they portrayed infrastructure -- other countries retaliate with policies of their own and such measures are therefore much more likely to destroy jobs than to create them. american workers are also paying a high price for the u.s. failure to open our highways to save mexican trucks. -- safe mexican trucks. they have imposed and billions of dollars in -- they have

imposed billions of dollars in retaliatory tariffs, costing united states an estimated 25,000 jobs. there are other proposals and policies in our own country that throw sand in the gears of commerce and destroy the u.s. competitive advantage. we have an uncompetitive corporate tax system. yet we keep hearing about some new punitive tax proposal that would put the industries at a disadvantage globally. banks, insurers, energy companies, firms that defer interest on taxes abroad. bigger target and pick your poison. furthermore, our immigration and visa policies are plainly broken, a complex and emotional subject that requires a whole other speech. i would like to come back and do that someday. there are suggestions that we should lashed out at the wrongs and others with high tariffs --

lash out at the wrongs of others with high tariffs. i fail to see how that will help families or create new jobs. these measures will do nothing to expand our own sales abroad. we're smarter, boulder, and more -- we need a smarter, boulder, and more comprehensive approach -- bolder, and more comprehensive approach. we need to seize the bull market place -- the global marketplace. it was built on the ratification and negotiant of trade and investment agreements across the globe -- and negotiation of trade and investment agreements across the globe. we do not have such an agenda today. the reason is clear and indefensible. organized labor spent in excess of $400 million in the last

election to help elect the current administration and the congressional majority. for reasons that defy logic or common sense, they vehemently opposed the very policies that could create millions of new jobs for american or purse, many of them unionized -- for american workers but, many of them unionize. america is being locked out and left behind. according to one survey, there are 260 to free trade agreements enforced around the globe today, but the united states, the largest economy in the world, has just 11 of those agreements covering 17 countries. america is a party to only one of broad agreement. we're far behind in the race to enact bilateral investment

treaties. the unions do not like these either. it is inexcusable for congress and the administration to sit on three excellent free trade agreements with colombia, p anama, and south korea. they released a study which warned that the u.s. could suffer a net loss of more than 380 billion dr. leonard 80,000 jobs and $40 billion in lost -- 80,000 jobsjob-- and $40 billion if we failed. the scenario is already unfolding. the e.u. will sign its ftawi with colombia. the canadian parliament will give final approval anto an fta

next month. canada and panama are signing a new free-trade agreement today. let us be clear. what does all this mean? it means that the eu and canada will be able to sell their products in those markets at a much better price. we will lose market share and jobs. simple as a-b-c. but that is not all. the south korean pact has the potential to be a model for others in the region, which now accounts for half of the global economy. we are talking about the future. there is -- there are the people of colombia. they're good friends and regional allies, who have stood up to the drug laws, -- drug lords, and reclaim their

country. that united states gives them the back of their hand is unconscionable. i hope those who oppose these market openings and jobs- creating agreements will listen closely for the results of the new study we commissioned and are releasing today. we looked at the fta's implemented over the past 25 years in 14 countries. here's what we found. they created 5.4 billion american jobs. the overall trade relationship with those countries supports a grand total of 17.7 million american jobs. i defy anyone in this town to name another budget neutral, a government initiative that has generated anything like this number of jobs. what about the trade deficit? trade skeptics site the trade

deficit as the reason not to negotiate fta's. taken as a group, the united states is running a trade surplus in manufacturing goods with our fta partners. that is on top of our global trade surplus in services and agricultural products. let me and under -- let me underscore a critical point. we will not only lose out on new jobs, we will lose existing jobs as well. how can congress and the unions, thinking about the members represent, sit by and allow this to happen? bilateral trade and investment agreements are critical. we must take other vital steps along the way. we must not give up on doha, a global agreement, no matter how many obituaries are written

about it, a global pact covering goods, agriculture, and services, is essential to the opening of markets and leveling of the playing field for the united states. regional pacts also hold promise, especially a trans- pacific partnership agreement and other arrangements designed to expand our presence in the world's fastest-growing region. we need to enforce our existing trade and investment agreements. they're not worth the paper they're written on if we do not act to enforce them. let's work with allies around the globe to combat economic nationalism. we must resist economic isolationism. the year to comply with our own principles or obligations -- failure to comply with our own principles or obligations endangers american jobs and undercuts our efforts to open markets around the world. we need to modernize the u.s.

export control system. at this point, i want to give the administration an important credit. we know they are reviewing this matter and crafting a proposal. we like what we have heard so far. we look forward to progress in the future. we need to do a better job of promoting exports. more than 280,000 u.s. small and medium-sized companies export, accounting for nearly 1/story of all u.s. merchandise exports. -- 1/3 of all u.s. merchandise exports. we need to change the number of people who do not export. we need to get our own house in order. to compete globally, fiscal discipline is critical. run away, entitlements spending might be the biggest challenge we face -- domestic or national. our country is at the top of the list. port education systems,

inadequate infrastructure -- ineffectual education system's going to -- we're working to forge positive solutions to these problems. let me conclude and do so where i began. we assessed the state of world trade. there is a lot going on around the world all the time. it is growing. it has got to keep growing. we need to be part of it. policymakers at home and abroad can act to celebrate this growth -- to accelerate this growth or stand in its way, meaning fewer jobs, less prosperity, and missed opportunity. the global business community could be doing a lot more to create jobs, to lift people out of poverty, to raise the standard of living, and to bring greater understanding and stability. if only our government and political leaders would let us do so.

leaders from beijing to brussels, to new delhi, to washington, they must raise the banner. they must foster a positive envvronment in which capital goods, services, and people, with all appropriate ground rules and safeguards, can flow freely across the globe. leaders in the business community and the labor movement have responsibilities as well. businesses must refrain from running the government to seek unfair competitive images in the global, competitive marketplace. union leaders must accept that their members' livelihoods rely on the growth of world trade and can no longer be allowed to dictate our global trade and commercial policy. those of us who believe in free enterprise and free trade have a

responsibility, too. we must do a far better job of explaining the benefits of open markets, while not glossing over the distractions -- destruction that affects some communities. make no mistake, we have to do something. we must devise ways to support effective programs to help people who are disenfranchised. that is no excuse to turn our backs on trade expansion and the new jobs and opportunities it can provide across the country. friends and allies abroad are starting to wonder and worry an d ask, where is the united states when it comes to a bold and visionary trade policy? we understand the political pressure facing the administration and congressional leaders. understanding does not mean we should accept it.

jobs are at stake. competitiveness is at stake. our role in image in the world is at stake. waiting until after the next election is neither possible -- plausible more defensible. there is always another election. the business community and our current national leaders clearly differ on some issues. i am here to say that bold and positive action to move the nation's trade agenda forward would receive the enthusiastic support and praise from the chamber and the american business community. not only would we support it, we would praise when it appeared we or our hearts out across the country to move it forward. the world economy is clearly not what it was 50 years ago, 20 years ago, or 10 years ago. it is time that we embrace the future. we have the best products. we have the best service.

we have the most innovation. we have the best workers and the best companies in the world. we have more and tougher competition than we have ever faced before. with been sitting on the sidelines for too long. -- we have been sitting on the sidelines for too long. it is time to get back in the game. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much for your time. we have many questions to ask you this afternoon. they're related to current events. i do not know if there is a day when we could not say that. there are so many business issues happening in the world 24/7. one of the big issues right now is the euro and agreed debt crisis and the impact that could have on u.s. exports. european union continues to live much of the world in recovering

from the global recession. the budget cuts to contain burgeoning debt loads may hamper growth. situationurope's affect the prospects for doubling u.s. exports within five years? >> your introduction to the question is something i have been thinking about a great deal. the last sentence, i was not sure where you were going. were you asking at trade question or the future of europe or the currency? let me make a couple of comments. what is going on in europe is really serious. the whole concept of the euro and some of the issues about the you -- the e.u. are being challenged. i'm concerned about chancellor merkel losing that election the other day. we need her in europe right now. we saw the new coalition formed in britain. we're looking at what happens in

greece, in portugal, spain, italy. we cannot bail all of the amount. it will affect our currency. we are already involved. it is going to effect our -- affect our trade. we have a massive trading and investment relationship with the e.u., although a large portion of it is with germany, france, and the u.k. finally, i do believe it is going to have an affect on the geopolitics we are all engaged in. europe has a fundamental problem in demographics. we all read an extraordinary social compact can cost a lot of money. we have to be thoughtful. we have to look down the road and ask a question, do we look like greece?

do we look like germany? do we look like something else that we want to look like? we had better learn from this and do so quickly. >> many european countries are experiencing difficulties and are considering -- or are being ordered to carry out fairly substantial tax increases to balance their budget, on the understanding that near-term economic pain is necessary if they're going to avoid worse in the long term. what affect would that have on u.s. government deficits? >> there are a number of things that the imf and the contributing nations are demanding of the countries that are going to get their share of this $1 trillion money. they're demanding to change the cost basis. that is the big argument and the violence in greece right now. the free lunch is going to start changing.

there will be increasing taxes. the major increase in taxes that i would support in greece is the idea of people paying taxes -- on the about 30% of people in the country pay taxes. we have a much more vigorous payment system in the u.s. we of the history of understanding what happens when you raise taxes. you critical of the money that the people of means have in this country -- you could take all of the money that the people of means have in this country. if the president did the right thing and appointed a really good commission to look up the deficit, there want to have cost cuts -- they are going to have cost cuts. we will have to deal with them. we will have to work on the tax side. there'll be some places we can reduced and some places we can increase. -- we can reduce and some places we can increase. we need to look at resources and

whether we can sell them around the world. that has provided a way for brazil to change their economic equation. it is going to become a more current issue. americans are concerned about fiscal deficits and long-term debt. we have a hell of a problem here. i hope we can all work together on it or certainly try. >> following up on your remarks on greece -- do you think enough people in the u.s. are paying taxes? should more americans be paying taxes? >> most people that make -- that are well-compensated or have their own businesses, the payment rate is in the high-90%. the other people usually find their way to jail. we have an extraordinary compliance system.

when you get into small companies and entrepreneurs -- what do we have? 26 million or 30 million small companies? i would suspect that the irs is right, that some of those guys are not paying all of their taxes. there was a thing in the health care bill that there will be al+ kinds of new irs agents. it will require companies, after they buy more than $600 worth of goods or services from someone or some company, to file their tax number as well as their own. at the end of the year, they will give a cumulative amount of money. they think there is a lot of money there. it will be interesting to see what those companies think about that. >> the european debt crisis shows that that can be a major problem. what u.s. spending -- cuts to u.s. spending with the chamber cut if tax rights -- if tax

hikes would be problematic? >> if all we have to do was fined $500 billion, that is probably easy. when you get to $600 billion, it would probably be hard. let's just think about that. 62% of the federal budget is entitlements. medicare. veterans' health care. that sort of stuff. when you go to the states, we have huge medicaid costs. there are pensions, social security, and social security stops giving us money -- we have been spending the social security payments. we have many issues here. we have to start looking at ways -- by the way, there have been great efforts. we have to have means testing.

we have to have some people working longer. when they put social security and medicare together, the average age of death was 62 years. it is now 79. let's keep working. i take responsibility for lightening this stuff up. people live so much longer, that is the problem. i like it. [laughter] you have to look at entitlements. we're building these deficits while the interest rates are way low. suppose we go back to 5%, 6%, 7%, and you're looking at annual payments that will scare you to death. we need to look carefully at this. what spending cuts would you support? i will support more than you think if we're going to have a real legitimate program. >> many congressional democrats have opposed ratification of free trade agreements like you discussed, negotiated by the bush ministers and, on the grounds that they do not

adequately addressed labor or environmental concerns. are they legitimate concerns back crafting free trade agreements? if so, is middle ground there that can be found in support of future trade accords? >> environmental and labor issues are legitimate questions between nations and among nations. i personally do not think they ought to be in free trade agreements. if you listen to the arguments the unions are making about the labor issues, i can tell you that the countries we trade with all of the world are not going -- i am not talking about health and welfare -- but u.s. labor standards and payment levels, because their economies are much lower. we're taking people and moving them, with all this trade got out of serious and challenging positions.

we're taking more people out of poverty and near-poverty than you could imagine. we're negotiating to environmental issues of the world come here, in copenhagen -- impairment issues all around the world. if you -- we are negotiating environmental issues all around the world. you could solve one issue now and tomorrow morning the labor unions would have a new issue. they're very concerned about jobs. i respect that. i'm concerned about jobs. but they are not helping jobs. when you look at organized labor in this country, are public employees -- they are worried about trade. if you want to make a note of what is going to happen in the next five years, there will be a war between public unionized employees and private, unionized employees, as the public employees require more and more

tax increases and other payments to pay for their very, very attractive pensions, health, and welfare, huge salaries, to be paid for by a lot of people, including only 7% of the work force that is unionized in the private sector. >> following up on the fault line that you expect to happen in the labor movement, are the front lines within the business community that you are dealing with now? >> people ask me that often appear talking in have 300,000 members -- people ask me that often. how can you have three and a thousand members yet 3 million companies and not -- how can you have 300,000 members and 3 million companies and not have disagreements? we of disagreement every day. we tried to get them to -- we have disagreements every day.

the difference is, in the business community, they are driven in a natural way. there are differences between people in service, manufacturing, technology, agriculture, and when are great challenges in strengths is the breadth of our membership. we're doing well and holding it together. i spend as much time doing that as i do negotiating with congress. >> you have talked about exports today. are you forgetting about imports and its effect on jobs in manufacturing? what are you doing to police bad guys dumping? >> imports are very important. there are a lot of commodities we cannot get from our own country. there are a lot of products that we want to have that we cannot get. by the way, these labels for the

union guys and their leaders that complain about trade -- they all go to wal-mart to shop. you get quality products at lower prices. it sets up a lot of competition. that is good for a competitive economy. in terms of dumping -- i am opposed to dumping. we have taken significant steps under the bush administration and the obama's administration to respond to some of the places where there is obvious dumping. there are some people around the world that think that some of the things we are pushing are coming in great numbers. you cannot get to be the largest exporter in the world without selling a lot of stuff to other people. ballads and quality are important. safety is important. that is not a reason not to negotiate an agreement and stick with it to create more american jobs.

>> there are several questions dealing with china. the exchange rate of the dollar and the renminbi have been a source of tension with beijing. how significant a factor is currency in driving the growth of the u.s.-china--- u.s.-china deficit? >> china is a complex, fascinating subject. let me say a word about the question and the value of the currency. i have long associated myself with those that the believe -- with those that believe the currency ought to be adjusted. the chinese want to keep these hundreds and hundreds of millions of people employed. their system of government requires them to do that. otherwise, they do not know how to deal with that many unemployed people and the unrest

that goes with it. i am probably more concerned about the stuff of our intellectual property and the changes that the chinese are making on the innovations side, trying to domestically control a lot of that, the counterfeiting of american products, which happens in the united states, just so you do not get too excited. it is the theft of intellectual property and counterfeiting of the united states which is a quarter-trillion dollar problem to our economy. we will talk about currency. they are getting -- i hope something happens at the g-20. my own view is that you make a moderate adjustments. it will not have a lot to affect the trade balance agreement. the chinese, to keep those people working, one they will do, if it gets difficult, it is

dropped the prices. that will help us on what we import and hurt us on what we're trying to sell competitively around the world. their economy is getting more sophisticated. they are getting more middle- class. the cost of doing things is going up. countries all around the world -- china is taking some of their production down the daisy chain -- vietnam, cambodia. the other issue, which is very important -- i talk all the time around the country. people said, all of these jobs -- michigan, pennsylvania, new york -- they went to china. the hell they did. they went to atlanta, texas, and arizona. there were some very visible exceptions, but most of the jobs that have gone to asia have gone there to try and take advantage of half of the global economy and to go in there and make business and keep the intellectual property and engineering and all that stuff in the united states.

it is clear that companies who can get greater efficiencies of scale or over in china and other places. they want to try and provide a better product at a lower price. >> u.s. trade is measured by fiscal exports and imports, about a fraction of u.s. sales through foreign-based affiliate's. how much attention should be paid to these sales when assessing the size and impact of the u.s. trade deficit? >> that is a great example. you can see it in three places. our largest trading partner is canada. a lot of that is in the automotive and heavy industry area. you just go back and forth across the bridge. if you to the border away, it is an integrated system. how much of the in and out is really being done across the

border that is really an integrated system? when you look in china and other places in asia or the americas, there are some -- i mentioned the box scores and others -- box stores and others who are doing a lot of producing in other countries. we have been working on this immigration -- maybe i will come back and talk about immigration -- since we were working on this and tightening the border, it is much harder to get seasonal workers and agricultural workers, legal or illegal. what are the farmers in california doing? they have gone to mexico. they are renting space in mexico -- land in mexico to grow their crops there and export them into the united states. you have raised a very good question. i do not have the exact numbers. we have been doing this for many years. the best place to look is mexico and canada.

>> let's talk about immigration. what is your reaction to arizonas immigration law? what effect will that have on u.s. labor cost and business? >> first of all, let me say what i think about immigration. there may be one american indian in here, but the rest of cost are all immigrants. i had an extraordinary experience on saturday night on ellis island. i got an award for something as the chamber had been doing over time. immigration is not why i went. i took the award because my wife's mother and father separately came to this country from challenging circumstances through ellis island. you can imagine that i have some very emotional feelings about this. so many people in this country made some in the great things happen here. they arrived in the same way.

i think we need an immigration bill. we need to find a way to have workers come back and forth to this country. we need seasonal agricultural workers. we desperately need to find ways to keep the these the people that come here -- keep the visa people that come here and get their ph.d.'s -- ph.d.'s. there are millions of illegal workers. now, you cannot find them. there would be telephone calls saying you need to bring your mother-in-law home from the nursing home. it would change a lot of people use -- people's views on this. we need a rational immigration

program. we have 12 billion or 13 billion people working who are hard- working -- 12 million or 13 million people who are hard working and trying to make a living. we do not have the people to replace them. by the way, we have to protect our border. i'm not worried about the people coming here to work. i am worried about some of the crazy people and the drug people and those people. let's go to arizona where the argument was because of this drug violence. president calderon will be here on wednesday for the whole afternoon. we are trying so harddto help him. he betz's life everyday on trying to stop he bets -- he bets his life every day on trying to stop this. my final view is that arizona went too far. we do not associate ourselves

with those that want to stop the all-star game, or stop trading with people. everybody else can say, let's not trade with california because we do not like their environmental rules. we need to fix the arizona thing in a hurry. it is fundamentally un-american. >> you made a reference to native americans. we have a native american question. do you include native american tribal businesses and can you demonstrate the benefits of free trade agreements with them? >> let's separate that. native american companies are certainly welcome on our travel deals. we have a little conversation with some people before. i am not on a trade promotion deal. i am encouraging my members to

go. i will encourage them to have some very serious, in-your-face conversations that you cannot do with a group that is big enough to be here in this room. i welcome any native american companies who are members of the chamber, who played by the rules, and i would be happy to have them. i am not sure -- i know something about the report issues, but i do not know enough. if the person who wrote the question will grab me on the way out, i will get myself educated. >> moving on. we had ron kirk here a few weeks ago. he talked about one of the problems being that his deputies are not being approved to implement trade policy. is that causing any problems for you in terms of your efforts and relations with the government? >> ron kirk is one of the best people the president appointed. he was a mayor, right down on

the border with mexico. he is a good man. he is trying very hard. he certainly should have is people confirmed. it took awhile to get him appointed. now we are trying to get him confirmed. we are encouraging those confirmations. we generally do not oppose any of those. congress is playing some games on that. part of it is on the trade deal. part of it is the same problem that i've articulated before. he has a problem. i hope he is going to get a winner really soon on the whole issue of contracting arrangements that we're going to make on sensitive bids. i am hopeful that will be a winner. he needs help from the white house and from congress, starting with the white house, or we'll never see these trade deals. by the way, his patients will wear thin pretty soon. >> does the chamber have any

major objections to elena kagan as nomination -- elena kagan's nomination to the supreme court? >> i will answer that question at the end of the sentence. at every supreme court nomination, we have a system where we review their qualifications. we do that and in almost every instance, we support them. it is the president's choice. if there approved by the aba and they are competent people, we're pretty much inclined to support them. we do the process, however, and keep doing it for the occasion however many times. the chamber has not finished its process, but i have no objection to her. >> with the 2010 elections coming up, in what ways with the chamber to a good vintage of the supreme court ruling on moving corporate limits on campaign funding? -- take advantage of the supreme

court ruling on moving corporate limits on campaign funding? >> we plan to be in the election. the most incorrect information i have seen in a long time -- it is all the stuff that came out on the citizens united decision out of the supreme court. the efforts by members of the house and senate to construct a bill that would basically, if you look at the numbers and configurations, be aimed at one thing -- keeping the chamber of the midterm elections. there was testimony in the house the other day. our lawyer, probably the best constitutional lawyer in the country, who had won the case originally, when up to testify that -- went up to testify about the and constitutionality. -- the un-constitutionality. they want to delay and keep us

out of elections. we still have to get through the senate. it is so patently political. if those people were distinguished, long-term members of the congress and the judiciary committee arguing constitutional issues, it would be one thing. they are responsible for seeing who gets elected on the democratic side of the house and senate. it ought to be embarrassing. guess what? even the "washington post" thinks so. >> if you look at the polls for 2010, there should be significant gains for republicans in the midterm elections. if that were the case, would it be easier to get trade agreement passed in 2011? -- trade agreements passed in 2011? >> today is may. the collection is in november. there will be primaries. we saw what happened to bennett

in utah. what will happen in the pennsylvania election next week? what will happen in hawaii? the political pundits who are telling you who is going to get elected -- they get up every morning. there are about 1000 of them who call each other until about 11:00 in the morning. [laughter] we have a system. is important.who

the bottom line is very simple. we will be in this collection. when you get finished, we will have some more of these or a few of those. you have to fight the same fight. you still have the unions around. i would say if we could balance the numbers and the toe, no matter who is in charge, we would have a better chance. >> we are almost out of time. there are a couple of important matters. i like to remind our members of feature speakers. next wednesday, we have the tim kaine, chair of the democratic national committee to talk about the prospects in the 2010 elections. on may 21, we will have the owner of the washington capitals. on may 26, barbara bush will be

here discussing. second, we like to present our guest with the traditional national press club mud. >> thank you very much. [applause] now at this time for the final question. i will read it word for word. ok, do not hold back, tell us what you really think of the u.s. labor unions. [laughter] >> we work with u.s. labor unions on infrastructure and on immigration, on national defense issues. many of them are made up of people that come from my family, extended family. i do not have any problem with labor union members. i have a problem of labor union leaders who have lost sight of

what is in the best interests of their members and are in this town holding back this economy and reducing the opportunities to create new jobs in labor unions members and non-labor union members. when the government gets bigger than the people they govern, we have a real problem. as i predicted, i think you are going to see some conflicts within the unions but if we me have any person running the seisu. to be an interesting time. i came here not to talk about them as organizations that to talk about the behavior that has caused us to leave a lot of jobs on the side of the road and a lot of americans wishing they had them. thank you very much. [applause]

>> thank you for coming, mr. donahue. would also like to thank the national press club staff for organizing today's event. for more informations about the national press club and on how to acquire a copy of today's program, please is our website at www.press.org. this meeting is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> all this week, and the senate has been working on a regulation bill. we talk to a reporter for an update. >> we are joined by stephen sloan of congressional quarterly. water summit the key changes? >> one of the most surprising changes that came through was an amendment from and dick durbin from illinois. he had an amendment that has been unsuccessful. it allows the federal reserve to limit the fees that debit card issuers can charge to retailers for processing a debit card transaction. when you go to the 711, the fed will be able to limit the amount of these that the data card will charge 7-eleven to process the transaction. >> one of lead number of amendments. how are the changes to the

regulation bill? what is that going to do when it comes to a final vote? >> it remains to be seen. depending on how the changes are perceived, it could make it harder for people to decide. it seems they are making the bill more extreme. it has the potential to sway people. >> you wrote in one of your articles that the senate democrats have to overcome tension in their own party to win pashas of the bill. >> there has been frustration on how the amendment process has worked out. the senator from north dakota had an exchange with chris dodd on the senate floor on thursday. he expressed his frustration that the bill would have changed credit defaults what it was not being allowed against the floor.

he said he understood the position that he was in. dodd has to get the bill moving. we cannot be weighted down by everybody's amendment. >> what are we going to see next week as the senate returns? >> 1b from sheldon whitehouse from rhode island. that would allow each state to set a cap on thexcessive interet rates that are charged by credit card companies operating in that state. the financial industry will fight hard against it. it seems we are seeing tide shifting in the direction of an anti-bank sentiment. it is an amendment that may have seemed far-fetched at one point. it could garner support. >> what can you tell us about the latest timetable that senator reid has for the bill? >> we expect him to file a

motion on monday that would limit amendments to only those that are germane. the motion will be filed on monday. the boat may not happen until wednesday. we are thinking that this is something that can happen by the end of next week. we will be voting tuesday, wednesday, and thursday. but could still have voting on friday. >> where with stephen sloan -- steven sloan. >> defending the united states again cyber attacks. the department's work with the pentagon and white house. the role of private networks in cyber security brita "the communicator's" on c-span. >> elena kagan is meeting with

senators in advance of her confirmation hearing. the more about the process in c- span's latest book, "the supreme court." it is available now in hardcover and also as in e-book. >> the state -- space shuttle atlantis launched in florida today for its final mission. the crew will spend 12 days in orbit and deliver a russian built research module to the international space station. 40,000 guests witnessed this launch including robert today and buzz aldrin.

>> going to internal reactants. >> copy. close and lock your visors. otc, that is in work. t >> t-mus two minutes and counting. activating the cameras on the rocket boosters. >> one minute 30 seconds.

the water system is now par arched. >> one minute. >> the sequencer will hand up to the flight computers at t minus 31 seconds. 15 seconds from now. rocket flight data activators are activated. t-minus 31 seconds. the handoff has occurred. >> 25.

>> a rocket nozzle gimbel check. firing chamber is armed. 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, at 3, 2, 1. 0. liftoff of space shuttle atlantis. they will achieve historical accomplishments in space. >> houston is now controlling. the maneuver is complete. they have a 51.6 degree 36 by 36 statute mile orbit.

the three main engines have now been throttled down to 72% as the orbiter prepares to pass to the area of maximum dynamic pressure in the lower atmosphere. it is just now beginning to throttle back up. >> the event you are go. throttle up. >> throttle. >> all three engines are looking fully good, that thatback at throttle now. the way it 4.5 million pounds. it has now burned half of the list of weight in propellant. one minute 30 seconds into the flight. all three of zadari power units

in good shape as are the fuel cells providing electricity to all of the systems on board. atlantis is 19 miles in out altitude.in coming up on staging the point of which the solid rocket boosters burn out and separate from the orbiter. booster separation confirmed. the onboard guidance system has done its job of settling out any of the distortions that have been introduced. >> this mission is scheduled to end when the shuttle atlantis returned to earth on may 26. planned only two more missions, discovery and endeavor, later this year.

>> copy. >> tonight on c-span, part of today's public policy conference at the cato institute. president obama comment on the oil spill in the gulf of mexico. secretary of state clinton meets with britain's new foreign minister. sarah palin talks to a meeting of the susan b. anthony list in washington. >> in the relentless revolution, ucla professor describes why capitalism is a cultural system and not just an economic one. >> today the cato institute held a series of talks on public policy. here is an hourlong portion. they will talk about the u.s. budget and counter-terrorism

efforts. first, [unintelligible] >> we joint ed and thanking you for coming today. i was tremendously proud last night at our end. too to seewere comine what we were doing. impressive youly progressiv hear from many colleagues this morning. i hope you are proud of the role you have played in making sure that a strong and intelligent voice for liberty, peace, and civil rights is available in washington where all too often it is not. let us move right to wrong -- right along with the program. our first baker is johan

norberg, a writer who focuses on individual liberty. he is the author and editor of several books. it include his newest book, "financial fiasco." his book in defense of global capitalism has been published in over 20 different countries. he is the author of "when mankind created the world" in 2006. he is also the co-editor of the classics of freedom in 2003. all of them are available in swedish and online at his website. his articles and pieces of hair regularly in international newspapers. he is an international presence. he is on television and radio

and print. here is the head of political ideas at a swedish free-market think tank from 2003 to 2005. he received his master's degree from stockholm university. join me in thanking him. [applause] >> thank you very much. good morning to you all. i hope you all had a good night last night. the hangover is not the problem. the party was. that really relates to the topic of my speech here about the next financial crisis. we are in the auditorium right now. hyatt reminded us that the recession is not the problem. the oom was.

all the bad investments made we thought the good times with gee's keep rolling and rolling. that gives us a clue as to why the markets are in a little bit turbulent right now. we never really did solve the problems that led to this crisis. whenever really lived with the hangover. instead, we tried to take a net a couple of shots of tequila and get on with it. a hangover that we believe in is not a good election slogan. saying that we will solve the problem and deal with it and the mccain get on, that is much more popular. that is why i have written this book on the financial crisis, also a film called "overdose" that will be screened here on monday about these problems that

we are still living with and we might see the worst is yet to come. the recession is a time to rid ourselves of bad investments. the bad risk that we took on when we thought that they were good risks. the recession is the time for creative destruction to make sure we dismantled the bad companies unveiled investments and make sure that work, of labor, and resources are transferred to more competitive businesses. that is not what we did. tried tonment' has protect in bailout that investment. in the car industries, we are still living with that. we are still living with those bad decisions. it'll have a tremendous affect on our growth i think.

worse than that, we are also creating new bad investments in the market. just as we encourage new bubbles in the housing market, we have now created new bubbles by lowering interest rates even more to almost 0%. that means that almost everything seems like a good deed until interest rates move back to their normal range. we have created new baubles everywhere. around the world, you know when the interest rate is low that you are not interested in holding capital. you are interested in borrowing someone else's capital. that is what is happening right now you might think that this is not a good time to hold the capital bank account because there is no rate of return. that is why no one does.

we will see a boom in the market even though it is far ahead of the long term profits of the industry. we see that especially in the emerging markets around the world right now. when we do this, when the central bank and treasury department steps in to bailouts practically all the bad investments that we can see, we treat a moral hazard. grigri in force that financial bets are one-way bet. if it turns out all right, you get to keep the profits. if not, you can pass it on to the taxpayers. if there is one that sums up this fiasco is one of the hit of bank who sayshe

that he is not worried because he thinks that the fed is our friend. they will just stepped in and supplies with more liquidity so the price will stay up. they will practically bail us out. that is what is happening right now. it is not just the fed. is the european central bank. it is governments all over the world. they give us another shot of tequila, more and bigger loans to deal with the risk that we are ready to calm. the times are great. now people are boring again. the interest-rate are so low. it isn't that a bit short term? what happens when the interest rates began to climb again? then the government will step them. isn't that great? that is great for some time. a crisis that was at least

partly the result of too interest-rate and too much debt in bad investments and a safety net for the financial industry that made too many people take excessive risks have been dealt with now with even lower interest rates, with even more debt, with even more bad investments. it is a stronger safety net for the big companies, the big banks and financial institutions. no lener will be in doubt that they will be given the money back from the taxpayers is the worst happens. the solution is the problem. that is why we had the problem in the first place . vernon smith says this in our film "overdosed." in a way, we are back to where we were in 2003/20041 way said,

that is great. at last a sigh of relief. now we are out of the worst times. the worst storm has passed a lot of stimulus has helped us. the difference this time is that now we are taking on much, much more debt. no one has paid his debt after the crisis. there is a bizarre ponzi scheme or the next institution with a larger pocket but just stepped in and takes on that debt. when they cannot pay its, the next person does. when we had european banks and european companies ready for bankruptcy, the european state government stepped in and pay for it. now the european countries and state and governments are in a crisis because they took on so much debt. then the european union had to step in with $1 trillion bailout package last week. we see the same thing here of

course. fannie mae and freddie mac can take on bad debt. then the federal government can step in and take on fannie mae and freddie mac's debt. who is going to save the european union? weekends with the problems under the rug for a while. after a while, we need another rug to sweep that run under it. in the end, we will need a really, really big rug. we are focusing now on prius. we are focusing now on portugal. there the country's system to be the most shaky for the moment. they are not alone, far from it. they face a budget deficit that is almost greek. the american public debts within two years will have the same level as portugal. i insert john mitchell will scare you more about these

problems ahead. we have all the unfunded liabilities for retirement and health care. if we are not going to reform the systems, then we are glad to have to pay in the european union and the that state about 8% of gdp every year to deal with that. that is it obama care does not add a single penny. as a market factor put it, at the problem was socialism is that sooner or later you'll run out of other people's money. right now we are running out of our children's and grandchildren's money. for a moment and might feel safe, especially if you have reserve currencies like the dollar. that is what they said the lehman brothers as well. the markets were still

interested in lending them money but did they still believed in them. its agreement brothers 158 years to build that credibility. it took in the weekend to visit one people understood that they will not be able to put their financial house in order. we have tried to bridge this recession the bridge that we built was so expensive that we will have problems with the growth rate in the future. it will be a problem to build something more out to this bridge. it is a bridge to nowhere, in other words. i am an optimist by nature and because of my historical studies. partly because i realize that people always make mistakes. we make horrible mistakes. yet, we created the rich civilization ever. we will probably be able to deal with these problems as well.

the reason why last year was so horrible was that it was only the second best year in mankind;s history when it comes to the total production of goods and services. it was so horrible because we all thought it was going to be the best year. we can do it. we can deal with these problems. it takes a lot of creative destruction. it takes real investment and hard work. that is the problem. thomas edison said, opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. the road to recovery is missed because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. if we can get this message to her about the difficulties and

about the possible solution, then we can do it. time is of the essence, a special with the debt we are building. thank you. >> we have a few minutes for questions and we will try to provide for each of our speakers. if the have a question, wait for the magic microphone to reach you. speak up. he would like to start? -- who would like to start? >> on monday, you are going to try to lift a little bit of the bill as to what you think the next crisis is going to acquit.

>> i'm telling you that you must sell now. this film is going to lick it a couple of different scenarios. the problem is that we see bubbles in so many places and so many categories. the most dramatic right story is the one about government debt and how we never really dealt with the losses in the financial sector. government just the debt over. now the market is saying that they look like the bad deals out there. why should we keep providing them with these funds? greece could a started this last week.

i do not know if you know how bad things were last week. it is not just greece. it is the whole european banking system. who owns the creek that it is the german and the french bank. what happened last week is that we saw a post-lehman brothers story. banks began to lose trust and one another. -- in one another. they said that give ourselves a bailout. finallye germans i'm accept accepted, it was $1 trillion. creece is tiny. it is the tiniest of countries. if it were an american state, i would not have even heard of it. if this continues in portugal or italy -- if this begins in one of these countries, it will

continue with the others. if britain did not have the track record that it has, we would have seen the same problem in britain we really need politicians who are ready to explain that we are going to see some difficult years ahead. we have to plan on how to deal with this and regain the confidence of the market. it is an incredible problem right now. there is a lot of capital on the market. we still have the story about american markets and how this crisis shows they are in good health. they made a lot of bad decisions in strange stimulus package is s. they can spend a lot of money. enlarge their resources have been going there and really build bubbles.

they are beginning to unwind. the chinese government decided they will be the world economy. they really have a command and control lending spree. they are starting to do with that right now. they are talking about this gigantic stimulus package. we are learning it is not just the stimulus package. local government and banks have probably learned about eight times more than that entire stimulus package over this last year or so.

that is one to have a tremendous of that. we have these debt and bubbles. we have to do with them precisely at the moment that this bridge is about to come down a little bit. that worries me. >> our next speaker is a senior fellow here at the cato institute in a top expert on tax reform. you probably know him as a strong advocate of a flat tax competition. he is a very strong voice and those discussions. he was an economist for senator bob packwood.

he also served on the 1998 bush/quayle transition team. he was the director of tax and budget policies for citizens for a sound economy. he holds a bachelor's and master's degree in economics from the university of georgia in a phd from george mason university. today he will be talking about america's impending disaster. >> that is the most recent introduction. i only have 10 minutes to talk about a topic that needs 10 hours, america is impending fiscal disaster. johann covered some of it.

i hate going after johan. and knowing the new york accent. he has eight suites danish accent. let me direct a couple of numbers to give you a sense of where we are. when bill clinton left office, the federal government spent 18.2% of gdp. whenever we produced, when bill clinton left office, the federal was grabbing 18.2% of it and read is repeating its most in an inefficient and harmful way. we thought bill clinton was a big government enemy. after eight years of bush, with republicans in control of the house and senate, what happened? the federal budget virtually doubled from $1.80 trillion to $3.50 trillion.

federal spending of the gdp went up to about 24% of gdp. an enormous, unprecedented increase. obama comes into office promising hope and change. what does he do? he gives us exactly the same spending policies as bush. bush gave as a so-called stimulus in 2008. a bum guesses a so-called stimulus in 2009 that did not work. obama gives this government run health care. it made my job very easy. i went back into all my papers. i crossed out the bush pose a name and wrote in obama's. all this bad news that we have seen in the last line from five years is actually just the tip of the iceberg. he could to the congressional budget office website and you

look at the long run budget forecast coming they do something going out in 75 years. let me give you a copy that. --caveat. [unintelligible] a lot of it is just based on demographics. what do we have in terms of entitlement programs? what is one to happen to the american population? how many younger workers are coming into the system? if you live at the long-term forecast, we are certainly probably wrong -- they estimate that federal government spending which today is around 25% of gdp, by the time it to be between 45% and 57% of gdp.

that dishes on the federal level. 45 sir to 67% of our economic output will be consumed by the federal government spending. if you add in state and local government which is right now at 13% of gdp in and you can see that we will be somewhere between 60% and more than 80% of gdp consumed by government. even johan's country does not have this. if we are all this eating cod and herring, we will all the swedish. what does it mean? if we have a federal government that big, it almost certainly means you have a giant tax burden as well. i want to talk a little bit about what comes along with the pending fiscal disaster that to be a value added tax.

this is our armageddon battle. they said obama care was waterloo. we what -- lost waterloo. that is just one thing. now we are having to look at what they are going to do to finance of this giant government spending that is coming down to fight. and given that the evidence from europe, they fit in value added taxes, often claiming they were just claiming they were going to reduce or get rid of other taxes or claiming that this was not a plan to increase the burden of government spending but to make the tax system work. all the rhetoric we are seeing are making the exact same arguments we solve in your 25,

30, 40 years ago. what is the evidence show from europe? it to go back to 1965 before year pad that the added taxes and you look at the data about what was the size of government, what was the size of the tax burden, you will see that government spending or maybe a couple of percentage points higher than we had in america at the time. since 1965, government has gotten bigger in america. the tax burden has increased. in the grand scheme of things, not that much. we have gone of a couple of percentage points. in some sense, that is a victory. we held government in check. in europe, government spending exploded. and these this was a better way of raising taxes.

what do you see when you look at income tax rate? what you see with a look at the burden of profit taxes? tax rates have come down. the overall burden have gone up. i can say with 99 putin 9% confident we will see exactly what happened in europe. the dying government we will have will be matched by a new, it disturbingly dangerous tax mechanism we will be in a position where there is no fundamental fiscal difference between america and europe. only america is about 30% richer than western europe on looking at measures such as per capita

gdp. there is a reason america is about 40% richer than europe on individual consumptions that looks at disposable incomes. we have not made the same mistakes he has made. the bush/obama policies are a down payment on this entitlement tsunami that is soon to sweep over america. it is just a way of letting the politicians know to go hog wild. go ahead and spend to your heart's content. if that happens, it happened a dead body of the cato in city. that is my pledge to you. thank you. [applause] if anyone has a question, it does raise your hand. the microphone will come around. i will be happy to