one of our academies is architecture and engineering. algebra is taught with an emphasis on structural issues. . . ?

of that particular career may offer at variety of different entry points. so it's not the sort of junior college aspects of having a medical career as an e.m.t. or a nursing or doctor entry point. and we find they make very good entry points. >> thank you very much. this has been a terrific panel. everybody's been great. i want to focus on dr.

mitchell. i'm sitting here marv ling from your responses from one a very rural population and if i listened riggt and heard right, the magic word to both of you were flexibility. when you gave the answer, well, it worked for us. meaning it might not work for you and what we did in chamberlain. and making it a small school i think is a real testimony to one of the things we need to look to. and the senators and i were in the conference committee of no child left behind. in the end, a lot of the reason that it didn't have any teeth, is we couldn't pass wit teeth. you talked about the two keys being flexibility and budgeting and flexibility and hiring. and i would echo that when i

was president of the the state board in georgia, we gay the system that were our top systems we gay them flexibilities. those who were not our best system we didn't give them any flexibility. what's your experience with the disagregation of the special needs children and n.y. schools? >> we are full inclusion and we serve special needs from moderate in severity to huge severity issues. we have a huge number of special needs kids. it's very difficult, but it's a must-have in those districts. and i think right now the

students in lusd are being overidentified. what we've noticed taking over lock is that we probably easily, 40% to 50% of those students have been put in a too restrictive environment. and they're serving them in a more classroom integrated environment which will better serve those kids. you tend to see that a lot in those communities, particularly in latino males which is sad and takes away from the actual issue. it's poor classroom management as translated into a special ed rating. i think that's sad. >> it also happens in rural systems not to mention 70% of chamberlain was identified as special needs, is that correct? >> just going back to your

first comment of flexibility. the rubber is going to hit the road for me. i just accepted a position that has 13,000 students. i feel very, very confident that it's going to work because i've seen it work in larger school districts than that. so the focus on instruction, collaboration, so forth, you think it's manage not limited to full schools. we used to identified some students as triple threats. they're native american and special ed. >> they counted against them three times. >> and we've had to really focus on that. and they're a major part of everything we do when it comes to providing extended opportunities and we found that in rural communities, the thing that was high priced and wasn't

a big bang for buck was a lot of out of district placement and a lot of kids farmed out to special placements. what we decided to do is train our people, bring them back and try to bringga high quality instruction in an inclusionary environment. but it does continue to be a certain difficult task for us in rural communities to provide what is needed for special education students to achieve what they immediate no achieve. >> is it also difficult in meeting n.y.p.? >> i would say it's probably one of the most difficult groups trying to make sure they're certainly -- for example, right now, i have a special education opening. i've had the same opening for five years. i can want get an applicant. it's very difficult to find people that are qualified or want to do the job. and make sure you have a high qualified teacher.

but certainly those students' needs are severe at times and really burn out people. >> can i get to my punch line? >> here's my punch line? i have -- you both have testified to the value of flexibility and budgeting, flexibility in hiring, flexibility in policy making, the rejid di of special education appears to be a particular problem because there's a diversity of special needs with the 1% exclusion. i have proposed that the special needs i sessment be determined by the i.e.p. i'd like your response to that. what you think about that? >> i'm not an educator. and so i don't think i would actually serve the panel right by offering an opinion on that.

so i'll leave it out to you. >> yeah, because i have an opinion. >> it is inherently unfair to special education students right now. everybody knows it. we go in and we have an i.e.p. meeting and even as a superintendent when they get really connlict. they want to bring me in. and go, really don't know what's going on. you the parents involved. you the providers involves, the teachers involved. they're trying to determine what would be the advocate educational plan for that student. so i would fully support based upon what we see now on failing our special education kids by holding accountable through this testing situation. the flexibility is not there for us. we have some highly cognitive kids that we have force to stake standardized testing. if you watch it happen you would believe it's inherently unfair. we need to go forward to hold those students accountable.

because they want to be held accountable for their learning. we just want to look for and find the appropriate method to do that. >> thank you very much to all of you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman for this hearing. thank you to a the panelists. one of the themes i've heard today among others is leadership. and whether it's about teaching or collaboration or results as dr. mitchell kind of laid out or you were kind of enough to mention the school recruitment act that i've authored with senator hatch. i want to ask you about principles. to what extent -- what is the

role of the principal in a turnaround? >> it's a multi-faceted role. and i think that we often still even saying that we put too much of the burden on them. we saw this image if we just find the right principal they can heroically turn the school around. and if they don't do it in a year, we'll get rid of them and try someone else. in a middle school or a high school, you're talk about a staff of 100 people easily. and for one person to come in and say i'm going to mold you to my vision. we put a gung ho principal on top of a leadership steam. it's the responsibility of the teaches and the counselors, those are the operators. >> i see dr. mitchell going -- oh, i wish we had an assistant principal. oh, i --

>> yep, yep, yep. >> so i really think we need to think about , especially in the high school have leadership teams and putting time in so they can plan together. and one mistake we do is try to turn it around in the summer. the school's still running and it's not a hos pit pal place hospitable place, because they think they're going to be fired. let's give them six months to have a design and be up and ready to go. >> well, mr. petruzzi, in blue dot -- is that -- i'm sorry what's the -- green dot -- blue, green. anyway, you have resident -- you do a residential thing where you basically a principal is went a mentor, is that

correct? >> we have a principal residency program with we train for a year. and they spend time with people that are doing it already. so right now we're training principals based on a lock experience, basically shadowing some of the best principals. also doing the assistant principal job for a month and a half. so they're learning the job, and that's very important. and we would love to continue funding it. and we don't have the money because of the budget cuts in california. but it is -- >> i want to get back with money with you in a second. >> dr. mitchell, you said that in rural schools, a superintendent can with the principal, the bus driver, the teacher, and a coach and more. i was just in minnesota at the end of last week and i had a round table of principal,

teachers, school bus drivers, coaches, they were the same person in many cases, but it really is a different deal for rural schools. and you don't have the flexibility at all to fire teachers because you talk about building capacity. how do you build capacity when you really don't have the resources? when you don't have the teachers around there, when you don't have those resources? >> yes. building capacity is resource intense active, not only in dollars but in times and in lots of different things. and there's lots of way you do it. i'm leighing the district, what's going to happen next -- i'm leaving the distribute, what's going to happen next?

it's not the tim mitchell show. it's you have to be a leader of leaders. so we have to build a capacity of all leaders but of teachers. i finally got smart enough to quit being the dictator of the district and got groups of teaches together and put a teacher leadership team in charge of it. i just facilitated them the things that needed to be done. the most important thing that i want in a principal is someone that's good and trained out of instructional leadership. we have some out of this program which is good practice to they can understand and prioritize the instruction of what they need to do. the second thing we need to is is a lot of research with marzano. i like that research because

there are 26 or 27 things that a principal has to d effectively. so i can do those six. that's why i don't want to be a principal anymore. >> i want to pull out isaacson and ask a real short question for mr. petruzzi because i'm sitting there just in awe of what you done. i heard you talk about fundraising. and i know you're from bing. and i know you know people, right? and then, i'm thinking how scaleable is this? and then you spoke to that. so i just want to make sure that -- because i've seen successful charter schools that have wonderful fundraising arms. >> so our moto is to break even on public dollars. the reason we needed to fund raise is that we actually had to build two extra school

buildings to support the student retention that we were achieving. we also have a -- the first three years we were basically building ninth grade academies that were growing and we had a first staff model -- >> but you the flexibility to do that because you -- >> because we fund raise. not from people i know but from the gate foundation and the del foundation. >> ok. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator? >> sorry i missed the testimony. i had another hearing. but i did have a chance to read all of your -- your submitted testimony. and i appreciate your -- your advocacy, i appreciate your work. and in trying to understand how we can -- how we can really be making a difference with some of our schools. mr. mitchell, i was interested in hearing some of the comments

that you had in response to senator franken. we've got some very serious challenges as you know, in the state of alaska as we try to reach out to our students that are very, very remote and very rural communities. and i'd be curious. you kind of joked, you know, that's why i don't want to be a principal anymore. one of the problems -- one one of the challenges that we face in our state is that we just can't get the administrators. we're doing a little bit better with our teacher recruitment and retention, although that's a serious challenge in some areas. but if all of these turnaround models really revolve getting a new principal, what do we do in finding these new principals particularly if their looking at it and saying, well, i'm going to be the first one on the boat out of here. how difficult is this going to

be in -- in rural states? >> well, as you probe -- probably know it was difficult before we started this process. and we've got people to check report cards and to see where a school is that. in south dakota we'll do a national search and we'll get six people to attempt the position. so certainly you could be creating, you know, some sort of a problem area here that is going to get worse and worse. we were talking this morning about i started as a superintendent when i was 35 years old. anybody could be a superintendent in south dakota. and so that's how i got the job. i've since got my full certification because i felt that was important. but the problem is, it's trying to get the people to do that hard work and get those people to unddrstand that even once they get those particular jobs,

once they put the bottles in place, they're still a possibility that even though they're supporting growth, they're not going to be able to reach the bar. so their going to force some sort of transformation which is going to send them down the road and put a blip on their recorr. so the recruitment and the retaining of people right now is getting to be at a very critical age especially as many of the administrators are aging and leaving the profession. >> i appreciate that. you had noted in your testimony that the research and being focused primarily on the middle and the high school students when you talking about those dropout indicators. but we all recognize that there are -- there are factors that come into play that certainly are contributors whether it's core vocabulary development or social indicators that are out

there. should we be looking earlier? and if so, how early -- you know, i look at -- at kids that get so frustrated so early on and that level of frustration never abates. if anything, it just gets worse. and i think that then it inhibits their ability. are we waiting too late on this? >> i think the answers we need to have a continuum of supports at all the key transitions. >> what are the key traasitions? >> the first transition is kindergarten through first grade. and math. the math gap, making sure it doesn't grow. they need to learn early on that schooling is joyful. if socializing is a chore, we all have to pass our tests that buildings over time. the next transition is in the

middle school. there's kids that do really well in elementary school but in early adolescents they're making a decision, this school right for me? and the transition into high school -- 25% of kids that struggle in the ninth grade had no trouble in the eighth grade. for them it was that older transition. and finally they've got to have pathways to post secondary success because they've learned how kids success. we've put tons of structure. and that's necessary. but that doesn't mean that you've prepared for a community college. it's really those four points. we needs those. >> is any one more important than the other? >> i don't think so. i think that's where we get in

trouble. if you miss one of them you're not good to go. >> i'm not sure that we're focused on the initial one yet, the pre-k to two. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator bennett. >> thank you for holding this hearing and thank you for your testimonies. it's been fascinating. on the flexibility question, there's a difference between giving people the flexibility to do something and giving the people the flicks -- flexibility to do nothing. which has been the outcome in too many places, i think. but having said that i would say the most turbulent thing when i did being superintendent of schools is close schools. i learned a lot of lessons and learned how to do it better. but there are always ways of doing it better. and i think one of the things that keeps people from doing this work is that turbulence.

and the problem with that is that kids end up with institutions where they're not learning anything year after year after year. and they're falling further and further behind. i know visions has done a lot of work in this area. i wonder if you would share about your years about how to diminish the level of turbulence that this kind of change comes with. and the other panelists may discuss what the reaction is which is often forgotten when they see the new vs. the old. >> it's a very great question. i think what we have tried to do positioned is a nonprofit with lots of connections into neighborhood groups across the cities to work very closely with community. we help them understand ha -- are. to help them under why things are happening, what options are

out there for individual students, to as we started new schools and new neighbors, bus parents to see -- new neighborhoods, bus parents to see and understand and have a vision of what it was that we were talking about and to create an atmosphere where that dialogue had a place in the community and in -- in -- and among that were going to be impacted. i think that was a hugely important thing. and it's something that you need to if you're engaged in turnaround work, spend a lot on the many districts think. >> do you think -- is it -- do -- this maybe an unfair question to ask you instead of the chancellor. but do you have a chance -- is beginning to replace defensive old or is that -- are you

seeing that tip at all in new york or baltimore or los angeles? >> i think the small schools that were created by new visions and a number of other nonprofit intermediaries are heavily in the main heavily oversubscribed, the choice process that students in new york go through to select a high school is one of commuter matches. and we see that the number of students that are actually positively desirous of getting into these schools vastly exceeds the number of seats that -- that doesn't help a situation where a parent in a school that is being closed and as the chancellor mentioned the philosophy of -- gradual. you simply stop taking students in and serve the students that are there as best you can.

but for a parent whose student is one of those closing schools, it's still very traumatic. and there's no way to sugarcoat that. >> baltimore is an interesting example because it's one of the few places where it's finally getting to scale. this year there is more high school kids or new kids or schools that were started in the past decade or so than schools that were started a couple of years ago. and you can see them going up in the newer starts or their restarts. so i do think you see that high turning when the sense is that there's enough good spaces ifer a lot of people. it's not just -- for a lot of people. it's not just a few. from the kids' point of view, no one understands that the schools are going nowhere other than the kids. they get a sense not much is

going on. nothing's going to happen. i can miss some days. the reason you get traumatic results, they will put everett because they see it's an engaging place to be. it's going somewhere. keeping the kids' point of view is important because they can vote with their feet and with their effort. >> do you have anything on this? >> i was going to say, i mean, you can't undercommunicate this with students and community. i mean, you have to engage them really early on and talk to them particularly in that turnaround situation. those kids actually recognize that they are needed. than if they're told they're not college material. and we have to show them that they are. the number one student cry is they didn't want to wear uniforms. and so the student body actually did a fashion show

with school uniforms. and that kind of broke the ice. 98% of students showed up with uniforms. >> i had a principal saying that had a rule about no gum chewing. he said, do i really care? am i really worried abbut it? he said, no,,but the fact that they are worrying about last question for mr. mitchell. mr. superintendent, i used to hate it when people asked me these questions, but on the -- on the human capital question that you were raising at the end about finding administrators and finding teachers in rural areas -- we face this in my state of colorado. if you would wave a magic wand, what would you change that you think would have an it. packet on your ability to be able to fill these positions that you were talking about?

>> i think sometimes inadvertently, we do a tremendous disservice to our profession. my wife is a teacher. she's a great teacher. but with her experience over the last 28 years, the thing she told her three daughters go get a degree something other than teaching because of the frustrations. one of the things that i saw in some latest research is that what teachers want most is supporting leadership. so if we could put supportive leadership in there and then leaders like myself who have to tell people, it is great to be a superintendent for schools. yes, it is hard work. it's great to be a principal. it is a calling. it is something you could be passionate about. sometimes we do our own profession a disservice by talking that way and not being good role models for sunts that we could -- students that we could ignite that passion in if we really put our minds to it. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

>> senator hay begin, -- hagin, senator reed. senator reed has to leave. i want to thank her for her hospitality. this is great payback for not leaving yoo in afghanistan. i understand. mr. balfanz, there's a lot of discussion around the different turnaround models. from your sense what kind of empirical evidence do we have? it might be that we haven't tried it a lot. >> yeah, i think the honest answer right now is we have mix evidence. you can point for successes and failure for every one of those models. we haven't done them in 200 places to find out where the average breaks out. but i really thinks that gets back to what i said. we really need to analyze each school's challenges and get a

design that fits that. in some cases it is a capacity challenge. but other places it's just simply, they haven't been exposed to -- what is a good program for kids that are two years behind in reading. it's the one size fits all is the struggle. >> yeah. and a wonder from your perspective and i'll ask your colleagues, do we have an ongoing research plan to try to validate these models rather than you have three items on the menu, pick one? it's your choice. >> i don't think there's yet one. i think this is going to be the big investment strategy to have that. part of it as a challenge is it's big scale research. how do you know you're doing eight things are part of the change. which parts matter? and so that's -- it's a big project to study that well. >> would anyone like to comment?

>> sorry. we have a lot of people studying this. i think the beauty about the lock high school is that we basically took over an entire tenets area so it's before and and the community hasn't actually, if anything, with this second great depression has actually gone with the tougher -- there's tougher issues than before. soy think we will likely have really good evidence by external evaluators in the next two or three years that will validate all this. >> yeah, but in the interim we are really pushing schools very hard to pick one and do it. and a lot of it is just kind of gut rather than, you know, empirical evidence. >> another aspect of this, the issue, and it came up in the contest at the top of picking out a percentage of teacher's

evaluations based on the performance of students. i think we all understand that outcomes are important even with the best sbrentions in the world. if a class is not performing, we've got to make changes. but there's a consequence, again, that people are thinking through this. the consequences innterms of gaining the classroom with the best teachers and saying, wait a second, if my pay depends on getting the best kids, i want the best kids. overlaying the system with seniority where you can choose your classics. has anyone thought through that? >> yeah, i mean, i think people are really strugwling that. because we do want to have evidence that you are making impact. but when you get down to the practicality of how to measure, that's where the problem comes up. even the technical level there's lots of problems at the

growth level because you have to average over the years to get a valid measure and then teachers are changing assignments. so how many of your teachers are you going to have that taught the classroom for years. there is a lot of technical challenges that have to be worked out. >> you're right there at the sphere in the military context. your impression about the potential with no rules to try to play the rules, and some of these rules, you know, taking teecher -- putting new teachers in giving them basically a year to make the grade or less what does that do in terms of unintended consequences? and i know this is a question that is cosmic but any response, i'd appreciate. >> i just recently got an e mail from back home. that said, the day went well.

congratulations. we're doing the dakota step test which is measuring our accountability. everybody understand. that everything can be determined in the next couple of weeks. so it's major concern. i have a concern about one of the things that is a key block to our success in chamberlain's collaboration. you know if you start putting in the competitiveness of the pay program. you know, i've looked a at the compensation. but to take it and make it a single -- because i'm sure i can find a track because you know, we know that some of the measurements here, the metrics are a little bit maybe unreliable, unvalid. that i might have a great teacher this year, but all of a sudden he's the -- she's not a

great teach ner the third year. >> i was in her class. >> what's it going to do to the system, is the key? motivation isn't always carrots and sticks. it's autonomy, it's mastery. as i mentioned earlier, some teachers are talking about the most important thing of staying in a school is the amount of leadership not the amounn of money they're being pate. >> and the sense of purpose, the sense but thank you very much for your testimony today and you leadership for many, many years. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, senator. >> senator hagin. >> thank you, senator harken for holdingngea as the committee moves forward in our efforts to reauthorize our electtary and secondary

education act it is up to us to understand in determining the lowest performing schools. we cannot allowing the schools with improperly serving our students. we've got to do better. as we strive to make sure that our students are career and college ready, i think we know that this is a task that is not going to be an easy one. and the time is now. dr. balfanz, in your testimony you talked about the nation's 2000 dropout factories. you know that each of these are linked with one or more middle schools where at least half of the eventual dropouts begin the process of disengaging from school. i believe that our middle school students are overlooked. and to that end, i have introduced legislation titled "the student attendance and success act." that acknowledges that true answery at the middle school --

trunesy grade levels in middle school are on their way to being a high school drop ow. we need to acknowledge before that's too late. >> and i understand that research has demonstrated by that by creating safe, learning environments and better communities and helping r students get back on track academically that students are much more likely to succeed. can you share your thoughts on the contributions at problems in the middle school level to the ultimate problem of dropouts. >> it's on two levels. if students are disengaged in the middle grades, they've had three years of developing bad habits. so it's that much more harder to turn it around. absenteeism in the middle grade are a problem.

secondly, it's on the achievement side and the related. we found that 40% of the kids between sixth grade going five years out missed a year or more of schooling. there's a gap that's not surprising, right? if you've missed that, how are you ready for high school? they have a no-win situation. they can say, let me remind you what we did yesterday and lose the kids that's there. and forge ahead and lose the kids that was there. those things, the achievement gap and the engagement gap in the middle grades really do present overwhelming problems in high school. i do agree with the idea that it's the sixth through 14 we have to focus on. it's the pathway to college and

career as a block as well as the elementaries is a block too but that's sort of a unit. >> have you seen successful models that solve that truancy problem? >> yes, a lot of these are attention problems. these are 12 year olds. so much of it is probably from the lack of attention. and already positive recognition perhaps, all sorts of tools. >> good. thank you. i understand that in year three of a school that doesn't meet annual yearly progress, that those schools are required to use title i funds to help with tutoring and hire private tutoring companies. dr. mitchell, talk about the quality of those private tudors. >> we have a real difficult time getting anybody to provide

that in the yurel areas. i it? the middle of the state it's either a two or three-hour drive to have face-to-face providers. we've had mix results with some of the online providers. so it's been -- it's been a mixed bag for us. but technically, we put more stock in our own work and our own schoolworking with extended learning opportunities to saturday school, to after school with our certified people. hopefully to provide the mediation that's necessary for those students. >> i've heard mixed statements about depending on where you are the quality and the expertise in some of the private tutoring. i know we've talked a lot about the rural schools. in north carolina, we have quite a few rural schools and it's always a problem finding the teachers who are qualified

and committed. and i think in many cases the teacher for america students are doing great jobs. senator bennett asked about waving the mmgic wand. we need the school psychologist. + we need the school social workers. you know, how do we structure this so that we make a great attempt at figuring out how problem?ing to solve this >> it's a difficult issue to find these people and one of the things that we've tried to do is we took a look at some of the research in cham bier lain and got our building of capacity in providing the skill training and the mastery and some different things like tuition credits for their recertification, the chance to go to a convention with their peers. we put all that stuff out there and allows us to provide that they're going to come to a supportive environment that's going to build their supportive

capacity. we help teachers become nationally board certified. we've tried to provide all kinds of building capacities once we get them there. getting them there is a difficult point. there are two things that are going on we're having some success with. it's a federal grant called project select. if you have a degree in anything, you can come in and you will be put with a teacher and for the whole year, you will teach under the tutelage of a certified staff member while taking all your classes to become a certified teacher. at the tend of that one year, you will be a certified teacher and be able to go into the classroom. so we've been looking at the traditional route. we have three people that are in that right now. then the people that retain the best, we grow them locally. we have some people in our community.

we're doing it now walls the foundation for health care because rural health care is having the same problem. it's finding the kids in the community to invest in them, build their capacity and continue to make them understand this is where their family is, this is where they have a connection. if we give you some support, will you stay in our community? and we've had some success in that also. >> thank you. i have one last question and i believe the green dots -- you said the school uniforms. how did you pay for those? did the students actually pay for those?

that with the committee. and see if that makes sense, if anyone wants to make a comment. >> it's a real concern for us in the competitive nature. you know, there's a lot of grant opportunitys that i know in our district we misout on because we do not have the capacity to do. what are we going do? it's a give or take in that particular situation. and i also agree with -- i'd be very supportive of the formula grant -- i want you to understand, i'm all for accountability. i don't think any formula grant should be delivering money to any school that's not putting forth results. you know, we used to have an education service agency that had a grant writer, tough economic times. what's the first thing the state had to cut?

they provided that. -pand they brought in a lot of our major grant. and now our grant writer is gone. it's a huge concern for us if large parts of new educational dollars are competitive in the rural situation. >> yes, go ahead. >> one thought i had, i wonder if there's a middle ground for this which is participation in this effort. if you get this money and you agree to do certain things, you have to share what you've learned. they're doing great stuff in south dakota. if you were linked together in a learning network and there's some obligation of what he's sharing as part of his grant, organizing the technical assistance, that might create a way that we can learn and not just compete and not get money and not learn anything. >> these school minutes tray tors would be happy to share

what they're learning, with the accountability, lay out a proposal in advance, but it's the notion of a few grants are available. we're going to get outcompeted and feel like this system is not designed to help small rural schools. but being able to go to a website where other schools are reporting their results, that's an incredibly learning forum, if you will to share their strategies. it's a good idea. dr. mitchell, another thing i wanted to ask because of your experience in the rural area is that it seems that some of the features are based on an urban school model. the idea of firing a principal and 50% of the teachers -- try making that work in a place where the next school is 60 minutes away. do we need to have other strategys that make sense in an

urban setting that we need to be careful to recognize that the rural setting is different? >> yeah. you know, i would agree with exactly what you're saying. you know, we're very concerned with the setting and we look at those turnaround models and don't have any options that are available for us. you have to understand that there's no one in the rural setting that does not want to be held accountability. there's no one in the rural areas, of the schools that are we're looking for some sort of option. many not all the research is there. but there is some research that is coming forward and we do have pockets of success. one of the things that i found in my little school district is our community and building or capacity. can we do that at the national level? one of the things that i found about a leader is that

collaborate more. they share experiences and so forth. we hope that when you come down to authorizing an aeca and you get to the point of the turnaround that we're not closing the door that certain school districts, they get to a certain point, do not have any option that's viable for them. we need to figure out that that option that still holds people accountable that doesn't allow persistent failure in rural schools but there is something there that allows them to recon sys constitute themselves other than -- reexecute -- recon city to thank the panel and -- for all of your testimonies for being here today and more than that, your

total involvement in education. first of all, let me justtsay -- listening to this whole thing today and i've head more and more hearings on this as i've sat in this committee for 22 years, it just seems that what we're involved in is always -- we're trying to fix the problem. all we're talking about is fixing problems here. why don't we try to answer the question -- what's causing the problem? it reminds me of the story of the community one time that was situated on the shores of a lake. the lake had a beautiful beach, recreational facilities and one time they noticed that the beach was filling up with all

kinds of junk and refuge and things like that so they cut down on their people visiting the beachhand the lake. and so the city council met and they passed an ordinance and they raised the levy and raised some money to clean it all up. they cleaned it all up and made it beautiful. people came back to the beach, back at the lake. a couple of years went back, the beach got dirty again. so the town council raised another levy. cleaned it all up. times. finally, one of these meetings, somebody got up and said -- where's all that stuff coming from? and someone said, you know the lake is fed by one river. where's that stuff coming from? what's up the river? they went up the river and found out where all the stuff

was coming from. stopped it there. prevented it from coming down. well, it seems to me a lot of times we do this in education. we're always patching and fixing, and mending, trying to clean up a problem. and we're not quite getting to the essence of it. in 1991, this book came out, "the unfinished agenda: a new vision for child development and education." i remembered that back in the committee, then-president reagan wanted to have a study done on education. why we weren't having a better education system, meeting the challenges of the future. he didn't want any of the soft-headed, pointy-headed liberals and people like that and school administrators and people like you involved in all this.

so he wanted the business community. he wanted the business community to do a study on education and what we needed for the future. and so that was established. and some years went by. now it's 1991. i find myself not as the chair of this committee, senator kennedy was. but i was chair of the sub appropriations committee at that time. and a man came to see me by the name of james renier. he was the president of honeywwll. he wanted to see me. fine. he wanted to talk to me about education. he delivered this book to me. he was the chair of that committee. the chair of this committee. and if you read the boor here, people like head of ceba, pacific mutual, arco chemical,

schmuckers, texas instrument -- you get the idea, right? and they did all the study over a few years period of time. and i think it lasted through the reagan administration and the bush administration. they ended their studies about 1990. they came out with their finding. he wanted to deliver this to me. jim renier wanted to see me. and you know what their executive decision was. the nation must redefine education as a process that begins at birth and recognizes that the potential for learning begins even earlier and encompasses the physical, social and cognitive development of children. education begins at birth and the preparation for education begins before birth. this whole thing -- this is the hard-headed business community of america said we've got pay

more attention to early childhood development. we've got to put more emphasis on early childhood learning. they went so far as to say, we need to put emphasis on maternal and infant care programs so that children are healthy. that's what this is all about. it's about pre-school. because they said by the time -- as we all know, that brain development during early years that east the best time for brain development. by the team these kids get to kindergarten and first grade, they're so far behind we're always trying to play catch-up. you talk about middle school -- they've been behind before that. yes, you can do some things. you can change structures. do all kinds of things like that. and you will make some progress. but it seems to me that if we really want to get to the crux of the problem, we have got to focus on early childhood,

education. , and so you're all in elementary and secondary education. that's what we're talking about. well, maybe we have to change about the way we think about this. you're all thinkers. you're all brilliant, bright people. your thinking is way above mine. but it seems to me that we ought to maybe, maybe, just maybe, we ought to think that elementary education doesn't start at kindergarten. maybe we need to redefine lem elementary education starting at birth. and therefore, elementary education encompasses pre-school. that might change a whole different way that we look at things if we redefine that. so i ask you to consider that -- that kind of a change. also ask you to consider structural changes. society in general, our society -- society in general on a

broad scope has changed immeasurably the last 400 years. think about that. think about how our society and the structure, everything we do, how much its changed in 400 years let alone the last 50. yet, there seems to -- one structure that hasn't changed in the last 400 years. think about it. you is a schoolhouse. you have a teach ner in front of the sclass. you have -- class. that's the instructional methodology. it's been that way forever. is that the right structure for teaching? some of you talked about this. and that is that senator dodd touched on it. a lot of these kids in school have a lot of problems that have nothing to do with their

brain power but has to do with their emotional structure, their whole structure -- you talked about that. these kids come from a home that the safest place they go to is a school. they see violence. they have bad diets, bad health . they're lucky -- some of them are even lucky if they have single parent around. many don't have that. and so they bring a lot of baggage with them to school. and they see

they're not trained child psychologists. they don't understand child development. maybe some do a little bit. that's not their forte. that's not why they're there. they're there to impart learning, to get kids to learn. maybe we don't need the structure of a classroom and a teacher any longer. maybe we need the structure of a classroom and a structure and a good child development/child psychologist also in that classroom. to handle the emotional and other structural problems of these kids. >> we had a project i was involved in 20-some years ago. mcdonald's corporation put up some money. that little project in which we reduced the number -- the ratii

of trained child psychologists. these are people at least with a master's degree. down to about one to -- i'm a little hazy here. maybe 100 to 200 kids. right now, the national average is about one in 3,000. there's about one trained psychologist for -- in each school system for every 3,000 kids in america. i could be off a little bit, but i don't think i'm off that much. we got it down to a couple hundred. which means we had a trained child psychologist at a school every day all day, interacting with the classrooms, interacting with the teachers, interacting with the kids. they went home, made home visits with the kids, found out what their family situation was like, found out what their health situation was like. the day you were talking bought that, about looking at their health, getting them the kind of dental assistance they need, the kind of eye glasses, the things like that.

>> in three years time, teachers were amazed. kids weren't fighting anymore. they weren't truant. they were starting to behave and act differently. because they had -- now we couldn't continue that. that was just a little pilot program. now, why do we do this? it costs money. it costs lots of money. it costs money to do that. but it seems to me we ought to start thinking about the structural entity of a classroom. shouldn't be the same way as it was the last 300 or 400 years. well, these are just some of my thoughts on this. i guess as chairman, i get to say these things, at the end since i sat here the longest. well, you sat here a long time, too. so i turn it over to you. do any of you have a few things you would like to impart for the record before we end the hearing? i'll just open it up. any last thing that sparked you,

no, you're on the wrong track, we have got to do something else. is there anything else that any of you would like to bring up? going once -- if not, again, the record will remain open. supposed to say this. leave the record open for 10 days for people to submit other testimony. and i would also ask you -- and i'm not just pandering to you. you are really the experts. you are people who know this so much better than those of us here. please follow our developments here. please follow as closely as you can what we're doing here. we're going to have more hearings on this. i don't know how many more. we've got quite a few more hearings. and then we'll develop the legislation. on how we go forward on this. i would invite you at any time

to get a hold of our staff, to submit e-mails to us, follow up on what you saw here today. if you think we're headed in the wrong direction, let us know. if you think we're headed in the right, let us know that also. this is an ongoing process. and we'll do the best job we can in trying to reauthorize the elementary and secondary education act. but i'm hopeful that we're not just going to reauthorize something that's going to be kind of making the same mistakes we've made in the past. surely we ought to learn something. by what went wrong in the past and try to do something a little bit differently. not to do something different for different's sake, but to do something different where we've tested it, where we've tried things out, if you say -- i think you said there's all kinds of different things out there that work. and try to find the best of those out there. i understand the idea of

flexibility. i appreciated what senator bennett said, that you don't want the flexibility to do nothing. you want the flexibility to move in a certain direction. but it also seems to me that there's a lot of superintendents out there, dr. mitchell, around the country, principals around the country, that would like to do something, but they don't know. i mean, they don't know what to do. they're busy people. they have their communities, their own families, school board to deal with, and parents and things like that. so what we might be able to do is provide that kind of a menu, something that they can draw from, but with a certain limit in there of what they might draw from to do. >> i agree, like most of you said, those four items like we had in the past, that doesn't cut it for most people. there has to be other things they can do also.

i don't mean to digress any further in getting into how you measure the early progress. if there's one thing, you can't measure progress against some unattainable goal. you must measure progress from where you've been, from how you grow, from where you are. and that's how you measure progress, not in trying to meet some unattainable type of a goal. well, that's enough from me. i thank you again very much. again, i invite you to continue to keep in touch with us as we develop this legislation. the committee will stand adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> coming up live tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, the south carolina governor's primary debate. three democratic candidates are running to fill the seat being vacated by governor mark sanford. see it tonight live here on c-span. >> this week, watch "book tv" in prime time. today on back room deals from washington to wall street. "new york daily news" columnist on s.e. cupp. talk radio host tammy bruce on the death of right and wrong. and hyper kermin on her experience in the american legal system. "book tv" prime time, all week and every weekend on c-span 2. >> i said, oh, my god, this

president is going to be impeached. this is about eight weeks later. but woodward said we can never use that word impeachment around this newsroom lest anybody think that we have some kind of agenda. but the awe of that moment stays with me. >> search for watergate with c-span's video library. see what other key players have said about the break-in and cover-up. explore washington, your way. the c-span video library, free online. >> now national security agency director general keith alexander. he's also in charge of u.s. cyber security, which was officially activated last month. this event from the center for strategic and international studies in washington is about an hour. >> with experts like jim lewis,

ceases is continuing to show leadership in this field. again, the report served as a key thread of continuity across two administrations and really set the foundation for crafting this administration's strategy for cyber and security. thank you for the opportunity to speak here today, as this is my first public engagement since i've been promoted, and assuming the command of u.s. cyber command. i am pleased to be here with all of you today, and can think of no better place to talk about cyber space and u.s. cyber but before i talk about u.s. cyber com and focus on the u.s. defense department, let me say up front that cyber security is a team support. i see a lot of the team out here in the audyents. we can't -- audience.

we can't do this alone. within the government, howard smith has the lead for coordinating the departments and agencies and our approach to cyber security. he has done a superb job and has been great to work with. for the team at d.h.s., phil ridinger, rear admiral mike brown and others have been great partners on a set of very complex issues. all of us in government recognize that government cannot do this without the help of industry, act deem ya, and our allies. securing cyber space is a team sport and we are proud to be a member of that team. we look forward to growing a partnership as we collectively address how we should secure our networks. let me talk about our portion of the team and our roles and responsibilities. two weeks ago, i was privileged to participate in the activation of u.s. cyber command.

as dr. hamry said, a task long in the making and long overdue. i think it was a brief confirmatioo process that we went there. that was a joke. i'm sorry. no more jokes. in 2005, the director of n.s.a. was duel-hatted as director of n.s.a. and the commander of the joint functional command net warfare. the commander of was commander of the joint task force and global network operations. in late 2008, as a result of a serious intrusions into our classified networks, the secretary of dense decided to place the ops urn my operational control. recognizing both the imperative for better sin cronization, synchronizing our offensive and defensive cyber capabilities as

well as the need to leverage n.s.a.'s intelligence capabilities to understanding the threat and the ability to respond to it. last june, the secretary of defend streamlined the control of our military's cyber capabilities. since that time, we have been building an organization and a mission alignment that is more integrated, synchronized, and effective in the support of our marines, coast guardsmen, and civilians. on may 21, that came together in the activation of u.s. cyber command. wed a cyber command are responsible day-to-day for directing the operations and defense of the department of defense networks and for the systemic and adaptive planning

integration and sin cronization of cyber activities, and when directed under the authority of the president, the commandser of u.s. strat com for conducting full spectrum operations to ensure u.s. and allied freedom of action in cyber space. that is quite a mouthful. i have difficulty saying it. i'm an army officer. reading is difficult. [laughter] partly, it means that u.s. cyber command will centralize command of military cyber space operations, strengthen d.o.d. cyber space capabilities, and integrate and bolster d.o.d.'s cyber expertise. deputy secretary of defense william lind explained our mission concisely last week. we will lead the day-to-day defense of all military networks, support military counterterrorism missions, and under the leadership of the department of homeland security, assist other government civil

authorities and industry partners. as secretary lind put it, the key part of cyber command is the lengthening of intelligence, offense, and defense under one roof. it's that simple, right? well, actually, to. it's not so simple at all. and it certainly will not be easy. the easy and simple stuff was done long ago. we got the rest. we have an enormous challenge ahead of us as a nation, as a department, and as a command. if i may, i'd like to sketch out some of our thinking on the interrelated set of issues that we call cyber space and how we hope to sort these issues. i hope resolve some of the more urgent demand issues. cyber space consists of vexingly complex systems that ship and store unimaginably vast amounts of data. by 2015, the number offnetwork hosts is expected to exceed the

human population. as harry knows, i'm doing my part to compete against that with 12 grandchildren. but it won't work. social networking and instant messaging accounts are exploding. by the end of 2010, it is projected that there will be 2.2 billion social networks worldwide and currently 2.4 billion instant messaging accounts. by 2014, they project that there will be over 3.7 billion social networking accounts and over 3.5 billion instant messaging accounts. in 1996, there were 16 million internet users worldwide. today, there are approximately 1.8 billion internet users across the globe. in 2009, there were a total of 90 trillion e-mails sent, and in

2010, around 247 billion e-mails sent every day. of those 247 billion e-mails, 200 billion were spam. you might ask how i know that. i got all the spam ones in my home account. i think we share those. geographically speaking, those e-mail users are probably not where you think they are. 47% are in asia. 23% from europe. and only 14% from north america. and 16% from other locations around the globe. in a sense, we humans are tying together all the libraries on our planet and making them accessible from everywhere instantly. the data in that common library of humanity increasingly forming the bay suss of our economic

wealth and contribute to our quality of life. tremendous opportunities for the future. and tremendous vulnerabilities. our data must be protected. no one here or anywhere else would consent to having all their personal and family information stored in a place where any random stranger could rummage through it. no business or non-profit enterprise, and certainly no nation, could long afford to leave its trade secrets, donor list, or diplomatic bargaining positions, lying around exposed. and yet, that is what in essence is happening more and more, as the ways we use to protect our personal enterprise and national security data are compromised by carelessness, poor design, and subterfuge. we now live in a world where a nation's security depends in no small part on the security awareness and practices of our agencies, firms, suppliers, school, friends, neighbors,

relatives, and, well, all of us. cyber space has become a critical enabler for all elements of national and military power. as president obama's national security strategy states, our digital infrastructure therefore is a strategic national asset in protecting it while safeguarding liberties is a national security priority. the national cyber initiative, which has been forged and implemented under two administrations now, is our guide for doing this. today our nation's interests are in jeopardy. the tech no logic convergence of telecommunications has boosted productivity and opportunity, but it has also introduced tremendous vulnerabilities and created new challenges. it is not alarmist to say that

the weakest link in our security can seriously impact our ability to operate securely and with confidence in cyber space. america's very wealth and strength make it a target in cyber space, and one of the pillars of that strength, our military, is at risk, perhaps to an even greater degree. our military depends on its network for command and control, communications, intelligence, operations, and logistics. we in the department of defense have more than seven million machines to protect, linked in 15,000 networks with 21 satellite gateways and 20,000 commercial circuits composed of countless devices and components. national and military information infrastructures, moreover, are increasingly intertwined. they include the internet, telecommunications network, computer systems, imbedded

processors and controllers in critical industries. that infrastructure is a sophisticated and robust -- it is sophisticated and robust, but it also has its weak points. dodd -- d.o.d. systems are probed approximately 250,000 times an hour. over six million times a day. and while our front line defenses are up to this challenge, we still have to devote too much of our time and resources to dealing with relatively mundane problems such as poorly engineered software, missing match patches, and poor configuration. you are all familiar with the general outlines of threats to network security from a growing array of foreign actors, terrorists, criminal groups, and individual hackers. indeed, these outlines are no secret to analysts inside and outside government, and are being treated and studied by industry efforts like verizon's

business risk team. in the data breeches that verizon investigated last year, and these were only reported cases, not all breaches, they found that criminal organizations often using custom-built malware are able to breech virtually every single organization they choose. a relative handful of such a tax, accounted for the vast preponderance of the 285 million records that the verizon investigators determined to be compromised. the main limitations on the abilities of these criminal organizations were time and resources. they simply did not have the time and the wherewithall to breach all the high value targets they could have so they concentrated on what they deemed the most profitable ones. those are just the criminal organizations. we should assume that foreign

government actor in cyber space have both considerably more resources and even more worrisome motivations than cyber criminals. in short, we face a dangerous combination of known and unknown vulnerabilities, strong adversary capabilities, and weak sitchuational awareness. the trends seem to be evolving if other ways that should also give us concern. a decade ago, network penetrations seem targeted mostly at exploiting data in. the last few years we saw the bar of conduct lowered for computer network attacks. in georgia in 2008. impeded government functions. and as i told dr. hamry, i think they also delayed me getting here. now there are hints about remote

sabotage. let me explain. estonia and georgia were denied service atax. once these attacks stopped, they were able to continue on with their job. but the potential for sabotage and destruction is now possible, and something we must treat for seriously. these threats are serious. to deal with them will require common vision and dedicated resources. our department of defense must be able to operate freely and defend its resources in cyber space. we will do this as we do it in the traditional military domains of land, sea, air, and space. cyber space is unique. it is a man-made domain. it is also an increasingly contested domain. that makes everything even tougher. our job in u.s. cyber command is to assure the right information

gets to the rights user at the right time and the right level of protection. the u.s. cyber command enables the defense department to better operate and protect our d.o.d. information networks and remains the focal point for military cyber space operations in collaboration with other components of the u.s. government. how will we do our job? as i mentioned earlier, we consolidated two already existing staffs. the joint functional component command for net warfare, and the joint task force global network operations. recently, we established a single coherent cyber joint operation center bringing together the capabilities of these two staffs, and we are currently executing command and control of our information

networks from fort meade. u.s. cyber command is co-located with the national security agency, which it is also my privilege to lead. n.s.a.'s capabilities, and more importantly, its people in the intelligence and information assurance field, are unsurpassed. this sbe lek -- intellectual and technological capital are essential to our success. u.s. cyber command is a military command that falls under title 10, but its business relies on the success of net speed intelligence, which is why co-locating the command with n.s.a. was not only wise, but an imperative. i know that some have concerns about intelligence community involvement in securing the nation's cyber infrastructure. those concerns are valid, which is why the professionals at the national security agency have robust and rigorous procedures to minimize the effects of

intelligence activities upon u.s. persons. n.s.a. also has an experienced and energetic oversight both internally and from the department of justice, the fisa corps, and from congress. this explains why co-location of cyber command with those same professionals is perhaps the best way to ensure the transparency of operations that can affect u.s. persons data and the protection of privacy and civil liberties as our military operations in cyber space. as of may 21, u.s. cyber command also gained service elements to support its mission. these include the army forces cyber command, the marine forces cyber command, the 24th air force, and the navy's 10th fleet cyber command under vice admiral barry mccullough, who i understand spoke to you a few months ago. while technology is part of the solution, of course, but the key

is people, and we have superb people, both at n.s.a. and at u.s. cyber command. one of our greatest challenges will be successfully recruiting, training, and retaining to ensure that we can sustain our ability to operate effectively in cyber space for the long-term. this is one of the key focus areas identified. the need to develop greater cyber expertise. the q.d.r. identified three other key imperatives for operating effectively in cyber space. one, we must develop an approach to operate in cyber space. two, we must spralize command of cyber operations. three, finally, we must enhance partnerships with other agencies and the government. this last point merits particular collaboration. our mission at cyber command

includes not only the defense of our military networks, but also a role in guarding our nation's defense industrial base. more than 90% of our military's energy is generated and distributed by the private sector. more than 80% of our logistics are transported by private companies. mission critical systems are designed, built, and often maintained by defense contractors. the military's networks are not neatly bounded. we rely on private sector networks and capabilities. hence ensuring that those partners and allies' networks are ensured is a key concern. -- secured is a key of concern. our adversaries will fiped our weak -- find our weakest link and exploit it, whether it is public and privately owned or operated.

that being said, it will be carefully designee to avoid providing preferential treatment to any particular private sector company. perhaps most importantly, this is an action that we need to do in partnership with d.h.s. at u.s. cyber command, we will approach these tasks by ensuring the right balance of integrated cyber and technical capabilities. we will pull together existing cyber space resources to create better synergy and synchronizization to defend d.o.d.'s networks. we integrating defense, offense, operations, and will leverage technical capabilities to provide coherent effects for strategic, operational, and tactical commanders. all of these steps support the armed service's ability to conduct high tempo, effective operations while protecting command and control systems in cyber infrastructure. in closing, i'd like to leave

you with some thoughts on how i think we can translate these imperatives into mission success to operate effectively in cyber space and how we can achieve these effects that we want. we must first understand our networks and build an effective cyber situational awareness in realtime through a shareable operating picture. we must share indications in warning threat data at net speed, among and between the various operating domains. we must synchronize command and control of integrated defensive and offensive capabilities also at net speed. we must leverage all tools of national power to ensure that america and other nations can gain the benefits of free movement in cyber space, continue to conduct international engagement in diplomacy efforts to improve this domain, review military actions to ensure they're

appropriate and effective. and considerable economic policy tools with the involvement of intelligence in law enforcement to dissuade those who seek to exploit cyber space for illicit gain. to achieve these efforts, we must recruit, educate, train, invest in, and retain a cad ray of cyber experts who will be conducting seamlessly inter-- seamless interoprabblet. finally, we must be able to operate and adapt to situations at net speed, levplging technology for automated autonomous decision make. together, n.s.a. and u.s. cyber command will be the intersection of military, intelligence, and information -- to the nation's comprehensive cyber strategy. we'll perform this mission with yur trust and confidence, but we will only succeed by working

ooze part of a coherent team. we will partner with all departments and agenciee. we will actively engage all branches of government. and we will exercise our powers and responsibilities under laws and ways designed to ensure that we are truly protecting, not infringing, the privacy and civil liberties of our fellow citizens. i appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts with you today. cyber security is among the most important current and future challenges d.o.d. and our nation faces. securing our networks is not just a d.o.d. issue. it is a national security issue+ with implication for all instruments of national power. the department of defense, u.s. cyber command will do its part to protect our great nation from elements wishing to do us harm in cyber space. as i said at the beginning, it is a privilege and honor to be a member of our cyber team.

now it's time for me to listen to your questions and concerns, and i hope to broaden the dialogue that you at csis have promoted on cyber space issues. i look forward to the interchange and i thank you very much again for your attention. [applause] >> great. well, thank you, general alexander. congratulations. if i can ask when people raise their questions, could you do me two favors. could you identify yourself when you ask them, and could you keep the questions brief so we can respect the general's schedule. he does have a few other things to do. with that, we had one over right in the front row there. >> you get a free mic out of this. >> how do you streamline

obtaining per mig for cyber attack in time for it to be tactically relevant, particularly against stateless opponents. >> that is a difficult issue. the question, i think everybody heard, is how do you streamline your counterattacks against c.n.a. attackers, especially if they're stateless. i think i would enlarge it to say if you can't attribute it, how do you do that? and i think what we have to establish are clear rules of engagement that say what we can stop. now, there are things that we can stop at the boundary, like an intrusion prevention system, that's one part of that strategy. but in the future, that may not be specific. so what the department is looking at, are what are the standing rules of engagement that we have. do those comport with the laws that we have? can we clearly articulate those

so that people can know and expect what will happen? i think we have to look at it in two different venues. what we're doing here in peacetime, and what we need to do in wartime to support those units that are in combat. and how do we ensure that the combat commanders have the command and control they need? if you think about it, this is the internet, the digital internet, now the commanding control system, which in the past was our old push to talk radio. when somebody would jam it, you would try to work with it. now how are we going to do that in cyber space? the answer is, i believe, working through a standard set of rules and having our force ready. that's something we have to take on. >> [inaudible] >> i do. i think that they may be all in one set. but those things you do in wartime i think are going to be different than what you do in peacetime. i had an opportunity in the hearing -- i can say this with

some level of humor. was asked this specific question about senator levin when we came up with three different venues. so how would cyber command act when we were at war in another country where both combatants are in one country. you could attribute the attack to your aggressor, your adversary, and you'd say now i know i'm going to do these and i'm under one set of rules of engagement. now it happens, that was case one. case two was what happens when the adversary uses a neutral country to bounce their attack through. and that is a different set. it's not unlike warfare where you have two -- you have armed conflict going in one state, and somebody attacks from a neutral state in. there are laws of land warfare that deal with that. we now have to look at that in light of cyber space. and then the third is what happens when it's the united states that's under attack? what are the rules for that and

how do we go through the threat conditions and stuff to mitigate or defeat that threat? those were the three conditions when we talk about each one in a different case. and as you think about those, each one of those are going to have different standing rules of engagement. and now, what we don't have is the precision in those standing rules of engagement yet that we need, and we're working through those with u.s. policy and up to the deputy's committees with the administration. >> i think we had harry, and then the gentleman in brown. >> good morning, sir. many of us in this room have worked on situational awareness for many years, common operational pictures and such. and during your comments, you mentioned that situational awareness is an area that definitely needs to be improved. i wonder if you could just

briefly describe perhaps where we are now with situational awareness, and the areas that you'd like to see improved in the future. >> well, i think in a nutshell, the hard part is -- and i can give you an analogy there. i'll use the national training center. in the national training center, one of the things they teach, our land forces, is how to seat see the battle feel and how to react in different situation. and getting the picture for the battalion and brigade commander, as you know, is a very necessary part of how they're going to conduct their campaign against an adversary and a very quick battle. fights may only last four to six hours. so understanding where your adversary is trying to go, where your reconnaissance goes, where his leading forces go, and all that, are some of the things we do at the nags -- national training center.

now we have no significanceuational awareness. oftentimes, our situational awareness is indeed forensics, which means that something has happened, we are now responding to that, and we are saying, ok, something got through. how do you see your network? and as you know as the former director of the defense information systems agency, a great agency, as you looked at that and you tried to look at all your networks, you didn't have realtime situational awareness of those seven million machines and all your networks. the consequence to that is it was almost policing after the fact, versus mitigating it in realtime. so the requirement, from my perspective, we need realtime situational awareness in our networks to see where something bad is happening to take action there at that time. that is both a coordination issue amongst the service and agencies and a situational

awareness issue. we do not have a common operating picture for our networks. we need to get that. we need to build that. and i think many in the industry would say, yep, we're working towards that but we don't have that with the breth that we need. if you take that to iraq and afghanistan, you'd find the same things. so we need to fix those. i would focus first on the war-fighting ones and fix the second one. the local one second. >> good morning. my name is scott thuse. i'm with the office of technology in the department of commerce. the question i have is regarding rush's proposal with significant support in the u.n. general assembly for a cyber warfare arms limitation treaty. and the question is whether you think something like that is

possible. the other part of that proposal is to create basically sovereignty on the net. and how would that -- do you think that can work? how would that impact your functions? >> let me take that in two parts. yes, no. [laughter] let me elaborate if i could. i do think that we have to establish the rules, and i think what it's the starting point for international debate, not at my level, but at levels above me. i think when they put that on the table, i think the secretary of defense, the secretary of state, the administration would take those carefully, consider those, and say now, what's the counterproposals from the united states from china, from russia, from europe, from the middle east. how do we put that on the table? i think we do have to establish that. with respect to sovereignty,

that much more complicated. the reason is look at our businesses as an example. they are multi-national in nature. and as a consequence, working with business and industry, industry and business working with government, we have opened up a set of vectors that don't easily drop to geographic nation-state boundaries. so i think the first may be the way to helping the second. the first part of your question. and i do think it's something that we should and probably will carefully consider. you know, i think those are the kinds of things that need to be put on the table, talked through, and start out as a -- call it version 1.0. randy. thanks for the call. >> general, congratulations on your promotion and thank you for your service. in your remarks, you talked about one of your, on your tood

list, discouraging bad paver. -- behavior. since that issue continued to receive some attention, i just wondered what are your thoughts with the potential of deterring the kinds of behaviors you talked about on the web. >> i used discourage because i couldn't pronounce the other word. i had to break it down into different parts. i do think that deterrence, let's go back to the previous question. if nation states agree on what we're going to do to deter malicious actors in cyber space, that will go a long ways to do this. in this case, it would be the joint cyber investigative joint task force, the f.b.i.'s thing, that would actually take within the domestic capabilities, as you well know.

they have a great capability. but it's not good enough for what we need. and i think there were some statistics last year that came out that said the amount of money being made in cyber space has eclipsed the drug trade. when you think about that, you can say, well, good news, the drug trade is down. i don't think that's true. [laughter] i think it's just the opposite. as a consequence, i think putting it from a nation's perspective, what's on those networks that we've got to secure? well, it's our intellectual property. it's the future of our country. it's the future of our industry. it's what's going to -- it will make up the future wealth of this nation. we've got to protect it. i think establishing those rules of the road in cyber space are going to be key. i think that's not a cyber com or defense department's

responsibility. we may play a part in it. i think that's really going to be state justice and the administration. technical role. ting role, a %- but i do think that laying out those rules and then going after those cyber actors who can come from any place in the world, bounce through any place in the world and attack anyone with virtual impunity, other ones that we have to police up first. it's a huge issue. >> good morning, general. congratulations. charles date of birth. -- dob. since the united states runs on ipv-4, do you see looking at a hybrid system for next

generation cyber warfare? or do you see that as something like multiple agencies? >> i think there's a lot of people looking at a transition. i think that's something that we will have to do at some point. you've hit all the key points. you know, it is kind of interesting when you ask that, though. i can remember somebody -- we were trying to explain why we aren't at ipv-6. they said, why don't you go to ipv-5? [laughter] and then you thought, ok, so i'm not going to answer it that way. although on average, that's probably where you want to be. it doesn't exist. so i do think it's something that we're going to work our way through. i think you can see tech neckly -- technically, we're going to have to make those moves there. i'm not sure -- and you probably are as aware as i am, there's a lot of debate. do we take a step beyond that?

what's that step going to be? i think that's still open for discussion. clearly you're going to have to take some of the benefits of ipv-6, the addressing and other things. i admitted that i have an ipad, and when you start to think about the tremendous capabilities that we have out there and you think about all these tools, your iphones and all these things that are coming out, the computing on the edge is growing huge. we're going to have to account for that. i think that's going to drive us down that road. i just don't know where it's going to end up. >> good morning, sir. cat hollis, institute for defense analysis. i have a questioning and i think it's pretty inherent. it's been touched on a little bit. there's a vulnerability in cyber that i think we kind of ignore, which comes along with all the social engineering posed by our allies, our non-allies, other countries in the world. nation states with little or no division between academia and

government. students raised with the role of promoting their government's goals. there's little or no repercussion for them. in fact, it's looked at in terms of probably a boon to their academic endeavors or their industrial endeavors if they can show ways that either they can get into, how they can compromise, how they can gain access into our networks, international networks, whether they're government, whether they're industry. my concern is how is -- is cyber command along with other agencies, along with industry in the united states actually going to address this? because i think as we look in the future, that's where our real threat lies. these are people brought up in how to do what we're trying to learn how to do. >> i think it goes back to the commerce issue that was asked earlier. i think the way to address that is by establishing the rules of the road. it's going to take all countries to get together and fix that. when all countries can come up and agree this is going to be the way we're going to operate and the way we're going to

defend, that will go a long way towards getting there. and the key will be how do we ensure that we all enforce it equally? that's going to be the hard part. and i think we're going to start walking down that road. that is not a u.s. cyber com lead. i think that's going to be state, the administration, and others. i think it's an international pssue that has to be addressed. and put on the table. a whole row of them. >> shevonne gordon with "the wall street journal." i had a follow-up on the situational awareness question. i was wondering what your role is in developing better situational awareness inside the u.s., nationally. in addition to that, what is the government's sort of role broadly in terms of ensuring privacy protection as it tries to get a better handle on the

problem. >> a couple parts. let me handle first my role with respect to the military networks and how we get situational awareness there. and in a war zone, as we said, i gave three cases. in a war zone, the commander has to have confidence in his command and control system. increasingly, our intelligence, our operations, our weapons platforms are all being brought together in cyber space. we have to have confidence that that space is secure, and whoever is running that space for that commander in that area has to know that that is secure. you can't afford to lose it. tremendous vulnerabilities. so my responsibility in that regard is to help articulate the requirements in the wartime effort, and then if you think about the defense department networks globally, in the defense department's networks. that's my role. if you look at the rest of the government, that's where phil ridinger and his folks are going to say, how do i now help the

other governments and agencies see their networks so they can operate and defend those, just as the military will defend it? our responsibility is to assist them if they ask for it, request for assistance, ask for technical assistance, we'll provide that assistance. i think from a national perspective, if we come up with a situational awareness tool, call it x, that we should have each other department pay to have acts developed for them, too, perhaps we could all use it. microsoft office, or something like that. i think that's the way to go through it. now, your third question, the third part of that. civil liberties and privacy. i think the key in this is oversight. this is really a tough issue when you think about civil liberties and privacy, when you're talking about classified information and areas. and so the way we've set up the oversight on that is by having a set of oversight mechanisms by

all branches of the government. government, a court system, and congress all need to play a part in that and know that the actions that we're taking, comport with law, and protect the civil liberties and privacy of our people. now, there's issues that you get into that, and you can take it from a domestic side, so what's the f.b.i. do when it gets a warrant, and what do we do with a foreign intelligence surveillance act court? both of those now get into classified areas with oversight. and so i think we do that very well. the hard part is we can't go out and tell everybody exactly what we did or we give up capability. it may be extremely useful in protecting our country and our allies. and so that's the real -- what i see as the two things that we balance. so i do spend a lot of time with the court and with congress explaining exactly what we're

doing, where we have issues, where there needs to be change, what we can and cannot do. and we put that up to the court and we get things back from the court. i think it is growing and getting better. we spent a lot of time on that, the hard part. we can't tell everybody what we're doing. it would be analogous to you explaining how you defended your computer system. you say i'm defending my computer system using the following steps. one, two, three, four. the adversary will say thank you, one, two, three, four, now i know how to get around it, and within a day they're through. that's the problem that we face. and so i think the real key to the issue, how do we build the confidence that we're doing it right with the american people, the congress, and everything else. you play a key role in that.

how do we explain it without giving up things that would cause us to have an attack or something go through while we concurrently protect our civil liberties and privacy. you know, i have four daughters, and as we said, 12 grandchildren. my daughters are huge users of this area, and they like their civil liberties and privacy, too. we want to ensure that they have that. that's one of the key foundations that this nation was built on, and that we take an oath to protect. and we take that very seriously. >> you know, i'm cognizant of the general's time, and he's been very generous, so maybe two more questions? you think that will work? >> i think we can go about 10 more minutes. >> about 15 years ago, a great deal was written about the threat of cyber warfare, cyber terrorism, the marsh commission,

a monograph was produced by csis. i wonder why it took 15 years to stand up your command? >> next question? [laughter] i think part of it had to do, they had to teach me to read along the way. and so that takes some time. you know, that's a tough question to answer. i think it's a combination of things. when was the department ready to stand it up. and how did we get there along the way? it is interesting to look at this. and i do think it merits a more serious part of the answer. it's not like this was a step function in getting to u.s. cyber command, that the 21st -- no cyber command -- boom, we're here. if you go back to 2002, when you saw the departmenn wrestling with how are we going to do this. first, which command sibling going to have the

responsibility? we looked at that and went to stratcom , and they said, we need technical expertise. they picked dissa. were you there at that time? they gave him the global network ops, the defend and operate mission. they looked at n.s.a. the rest is explained. but it takes time to evolve it. so it's not something we just jumped into. i think it's a well-thought-out approach. and we are one step further along. i think it's going pretty good. >> the lady in the center -- is that kate? hi, kate. >> hi. kate martin from the center for national security studies. i wanted to thank you, general, for your commitment to protecting civil liberties and privacy and your recognition of the importance of oversight by the court and the congress.

and acknowledge that the problem protecting national security classified information is very difficult and important in this field. i ask you whether -- during the last administration, i think lots of members of congress as well as those investing in the civil liberties community concluded that in fact the intelligence capabilities were illegally trained on u.s. citizens. so the question becomes despite those oversight mechanisms, how do prevent that from happening again, and whether or not you can undertake that initiative to look at the possibility of a greater public transparency given the necessity for national security servicing in this field in order to help build the public confidence. >> that's an easy question.

i'm going to turn it over to -- no. first, you made some statements that i don't agree 100% with, so i'm just going to put it back in my words, if i could. illegal. versus the constitutional article one, article two, article three. now, i'm not a lawyer. i just admitted that i just learned to read. so i'm not a lawyer. so what are the roles of the three branches of the government and how do we do that? what are the roles and responsibilities for the president to do his job, what are the roles for congress, and what are the roles for the court? articulated in our constitution. and what we have is a constitutional issue that we put down on the table. if you take 9/11, a tragic event for our country, the question is how do we ensure that we don't have another terrorist attack, and we don't give up our civil liberties and privacy? both of those are national

objectives that we want to achieve. and when you look at that, are ones that we're trying to achieve. so i think what i can do is jump forward. it's hard for me to jump backwards, because i came in in the middle of the last debate. and say here's my opinion. the way to do this in the future, transparency at the classified level between congress, the court, and the administration and what we're doing so that all three agree 100% that this is the right way. .

[laughter] >> if we divided the room in half and put half the lawyers on one side and have on the other, we could debate this issue until we all go to sleep. the issue that we really face, the one that you are driving at, is where our country wants to beat. we want to protect -- some people say the constitution is not a way up and down.

as i said, when you look at that, there are a lot of legal reviews that go into this, many of which are classified. the bottom line, i think we are doing this right. it does not mean we will not make a mistake. from my perspective, i can tell you that we spent an awful lot of time ensuring we are doing it both to protect the country and everything we can on that side and to protect civil liberties and privacy. i sleep good at night because of that. >> we started the series, at&t has helped us to underwrite its and support it. we started the series in september of 2009 with the deputy secretary who is supposed to announce its cyber command. i am grateful that sometime later we got results. i think that was tremendous speech. thank you very much for taking these questions.

please join me and around of applause. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> live tonight, the south carolina democratic governors of debate. see it tonight live, here on c- span. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and on line. you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and you too, and sign up for scheduled alert e-mail's act c-span.org. >> this weekend, noted feminist, arthur, a noted

scholar nussbaum. she has written or contributed to more than 20 books. join our three-hour discussion on "book tv" in depth. >> white house press secretary robert gibbs said the u.s. would not change its position on the flotilla. he speaks about gaza, the gulf oil spill, and other topics, for about an hour. >> one quick scheduling update for you all. tomorrow before departing for the gulf, the president will stop with the vice-president at a business in maayland to comment on the may employment numbers that will be released tomorrow. they will visit a commercial truck dealership and truck parts supplier.

the president and vice president will do a tour with workers and the president will make brief remarks. >> did the president signed off about at the prospect of jobs? what is his reaction to this? as i have not talked to him about this. >> we now have two confirmed cases of the white house trying to encourage democratic khanates to about out of -- candidates to bowed out of primaries. >> i think the leaders of parties have long had an interest in ensuring the supporters did not run against each other in contested primaries. that is what was done in this

case. >> do you think the white house has been transparent about this? ihas the white house been transparent about these offers? why has it taken so long for this to come out? >> i think you have all received quite a bit of information about this and i do believe we have been transparent. >> overall, does the president stand by these offers? >> again, the president as the leader of the party has an interest in ensuring that supporters don't run against each other in contested primaries. >> that makes it sound like he did know about them. >> i don't think -- we went through a pretty contested primary.

>> can you talk about what the president hopes to accomplish on his trip and talk a little bit about what the is going to be doing down there? >> we will have some scheduling details for you all shortly. i think the president will likely see governors again. i think he will speak with individuals and business leaders that have been affected directly by the economic consequences of the spill and continue to get from admiral allen a first hand update on our progress, both in dealing with the well and in dealing with the spread of pollution that has

leaked from the well. i think the president believed that last week's trip was tremendously productive. we had a two-hour meeting with perished presidents from louisiana affected by the spill , senators and a congressman from louisiana, governors from many of the gulf states. along with the coast guard, the president believed it was a productive atmosphere in ensuring that everybody's causes and concerns were hurt and ultimately met. >> can you talk about the criticism that the president is not making that emotional connection with people over that spill? >> i said this last night. if jumping up and down and screaming would fix the hole in the ocean, we would have done

that fiber six weeks ago. we would have done that the first night. the president will be judged on our response and recovery efforts to what we all know now is the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history. but pounding on a podium is not going to fix a hole in the ocean. i think what the american people and the citizens of the gulf or expecting our results. that is what the president will be measured by. i will leave emotional psychiatrist to others. >> you mentioned in the may jobs report. some democrats are worried about the budget and -- are you concerned that political capital has been weakened from this? just the fact that he is dealing with a lot of criticism over this right now and that is

taking a lot of white house time. >> i said earlier this week, no white house at any time had the luxury of picking the events that it deals with. both on a domestic and on the international scene. that is part of the job. the american people did not elect people they do nnt think can walk into -- walk and chew gum at the same time. i think if you look at the progress we have made, let's go back the past six weeks. we have seen sanctions introduced at the un security council that we believe will be voted on next week. we passed financial reform for the senate, and i think it is likely that bill will be signed into law before the july 4 recess. we have nominated a supreme

court justice that i believe will be confirmed before the august recess. we have completed fairly recently a new start treaty that we believe will be ratified by the end of the year. we will get a chance tomorrow to l.a. with the progress we are making through the jobs report on our economic recovery. we have had a very full agenda, not just in the past 44 or 45 days but for the past 16 months. there are a lot of people working on a whole lot of things in the white house. we are able to do more than several things at once. >> it is clear that the u.s. government knew about the flotilla before the israeli navy stated. does the obama administration it

was on a humanitarian mission, are trying to provoke israel into a reaction? >> i can try to -- there is a blockade to ensure that weapons are not brought in for hamas. yet heard the president and the secretary of state discuss what we believe is an unsustainable humanitarian presence in gaza. >> i assume the president knows that one of the deaths was an american. what was his reaction? >> i am told that he expressed his deep condolences, and we

certainly expressed our deep condolences to his family. obviously, this is extremely horrible news for them. our ambassador has been in touch with his father, and i would reiterate that we have, with the un security council, condemned to the acts that have led to these deaths. >> we talked about this before and i understand it was written -- by condemning the act that condemn the people on the flotilla. does the fact that one of the victims was an american born in new york change at all the u.s.

view of what happened or the u.s. position on what happened? >> i would reiterate, we have condemned the act. i am going down the other side of the street. we have called for and the un security council has called for a full and credible investigation so that we have all the facts about what happened. that is tremendously important. i said just a couple of days ago that that could include international participation in that investigation. >> doesn't it change the fact that one of those killed was an

american? doesn't that by necessity change the view of the u.s. government? if tend greeks or turks are killed, the government would condemn the act and think it was a horrible thing, but it is different if an american was killed. >> that is why i started this answer by expressing the deep condolences of the united states government and the president's condolences. >> the impact that the deep water a moratorium could have within the next 1218 months on jobs, and what that would mean for high-paying jobs. what is the white house reaction to the potential on employment? >> this was something the

president discussed with his team prior to the release of the report that halted the 33 existing drilling actions, a situation we did not take lightly. i think it is important that we understand exactly why this accident happened and ensure that if there is something that was preventable, that we ensure that every one of these activities, these drilling permits, takes any of that into account. i understand that what happened in this incident on the deepwater horizon was, after the drilling reached the reservoir of oil, in the process of tapping that well, each of these 33 deep water permits are at

some debt toward reaching that well. let's have an investigation to ensure that the capping of those exploratory wells, with proper blowout preventers and fail-safe mechanisms, that we have a full investigation. that is what the commission is going to look into. the president. i think the governor sent that letter -- governor jindal has been rightly critical of bp. four of those drilling permit were either solely are jointly operated by bp. i don't know if he has more confidence in the drilling procedures than he does in their response efforts, but the president certainly believed

that was something that needed to be looked into before those permits were continued. there is a loss of jobs because of what happened. everybody is interviewing fishermen cannot fish. your interview and hotel owners if you are interviewing hotel owners whose reservations have been canceled. let's ensure that as the president outlined, and what he wants the commission to look at, is that there is a regulatory framework that makes drilling as fail-safe as bp and other companies say it is. that is what is important. >> does the white house believe it was a mistake for the president not to meet with fishermen and other locals? >> we met with fishermen on may

1 when we went down there. >> there is been some criticism that he did not spend enough time talking to the real people on the ground. >> i think it was a pretty large representation of people in that room. the mayor of grand isle, who has 10,000 people on his beach for memorial day was not likely to have any people on the beach. similar stories that the president got several weeks earlier from fisherman in the gulf region. the president is well aware of the pain and suffering that this accident is causing, and that is why he has asked that we do everything we can. that is why very early on in this process, the small business

administration set up a process for many of those small business owners to obtain very low interest loans while economic damages are recovered from bp. the federal government will at some point today send what i would call a bill for $69 million of expenses incurred up to this point to bp, to be reimbursed to the taxpayers as part of the oil pollution act, for expenditures in response for dod expenditures in moving assets to the region, for a whole host of things that bp will be paying the tax payers for. >> how much time did have to pay that? >> i don't know what the time

limit is. >> since the white house administration has been calling a lot of shots on what takes place in the gulf, is there pressure on bp to make the cut a public apology we have been seeing from the ceo? was the white house pushing for that? >> i don't know if others had conversations with admiral allen. i don't think there is any doubts that we have seen comments from the ceo that he has apologized for, and rightly so. i don't think a ceo needs to tell people on the gulf that there is not any pollution. there are 11 people we would all like to have their lives back there were killed the very first thought of this incident. the harm that is being done

there will take years to fix. we will hold bp responsible throughout this process. >> with the preeident in the rose garden threatening are talking about the possibility of criminal actioo, has that made the relationship with bp difficult in any way? it really seems to be a hostile relationship right now. when you are talking about bringing criminal charges against one and then trying to work with them as a partner to solve our problem. >> they have an obligation to fix the whole that is on the bottom of the ocean floor. we have an obligation as the federal government to ensure that the laws of this country have been of help. -- have been upheld.

>> does the president believed that he is playing catch up now? is he going to be going more regularly? >> i don't know which critic you are talking about. >> you could name dozens of them. just go with colin powell and james carville, who believe he was too slow? >> each has said that we ought to have a comprehensive response. >> that he should have done everything two weeks earlier. >> i don't know what the critique was when the president was there on may 2. ?ñ9[>> last week was tremendouy productive. he had gone two weeks before -- it was tremendously productive that friday, would not have been

more productive the hit on the week before? >> he went before the week before, the week before, the week before. he did not go each of the last weeks. he will be there as often as the situation dictates. obviously, we are dealing with the worst internal disaster in our nation's history. -- the worst environmental disaster. we have mobilized the largest federal response in our nation's history, and we will continue to make sure that all is being done to plug the leak and to deal with the environmental and economic consequences of what that pollution has caused. i don't have any updates on the schedule. as soon as i do, i will certainly let you guys know. >> how much of the president's schedule is being changed or altered due to this bill at this

point? how much of his day, his schedule -- >> he gets an update in the oval office each day between the daily intelligence briefing and the daily economic briefing. like a whole host of issues, the president's gets regular updates -- the president gets regular updates on a whole host of issues. >> when you see jon stewart mocking the president -- >> i have not watched tv for two weeks that is not news. i love jon stewart, he is a funny guy, but i have not watched him recently. >> the president is the

president 24 hours a day. i don't think he would suggest we stop doing intelligence briefings on things like afghanistan and pakistan because of what is going on in the gulf. on any given day, the president is working on b.g.e. even on a quiet day's -- even on the quiet days, the president is working. the schedule has not been curtailed. we seem to be well on track to get a new supreme court justice by the august recess. my hunch is we will sign of financial reform bill prior to the july 4 recess. we will get un sanctions against iran, which not a lot of people bought six weeks ago at the

beginning of this bill we had a chance of getting. i appreciate that sometimes you guys have one story a day. we do not necessarily deal with just one story every day. >> [unintelligible] >> nobody comes into this administration can regulate any employer that they work for previously. >> you quoted tony hayward just how about trying to get his own life back. >> i am not going to do their pr.

they will make their decision on who they think should talk to the american people. i hope that the current -- the company continues to answer the questions that the american people want to know the answers to. that is important to do. >> had been briefed on the next plan? every time there seems to be one of these attempts at stopping the leak, the next plan has been in the works. are you guys aware of the next plan? >> there always was, based on the type of cap that will go on the riser was predicated on the smoothness of the cut. i believe there are several different caps that are there. i am told that they are moving ships into the region, moving

ships over the well. the cap will be lowered in slowly to ensure that the hydrates problem we encountered with previous attempts will be minimized. there will continue to be contingencies on what happened. it is important to understand, there is one permanent solution, that is a relief well. bp began to drill that relief well. one of the things we have already taken from this is, you have built in redundancy into the system. if for some reason a problem is incurred in either of the first two wells, we'll ask them to drill a third well. there is a whole host of different scenarios that we are working on. >> part of the defense on the romanov matter is that it was an

unpaid position and it was done through an intermediary. they worere three paid position. does that make it fundamentally different? >> there was not a job offer and there was not a job promised. mr. romanov applied for a job in government service during the transition. i think that is the fact pattern. >> if i apply for a job and then an employer comes back and says i have these three, does my application for that job change the fact that i might have been offered three? >> if you apply for the job and

expressed an interest in several different departments like usaid. >> have you heard anything from the look flow rate people on what they are seeing from the cut riser, and do you feel like the images of that lead or substantiating what you thought would happen? >> i will have somebody -- i do not know of any new estimates from the flow rate technical group. again, we thought it was important that based on what we heard from the head of the flow rate technical group, that cutting the top of that riser could increase the amount of hydrocarbon by 20%. i do not know, and i am not

entirely sure that we can altogether ascertain just from a flat screen image of the riser cut the degree to which that hydrocarbon flow had increased. let me check on that flow rate. >> if the u.s. is in charge of the oil spill, why is the bp corp. going to be giving operational updates? >> the remotely operated vehicles, the sheer cut operation is being conducted by them, because they are the only people in this scenario that had the type of technical expertise in order for a cut with a diamond sought to happen. the federal on scene coordinator, admiral -- rear admiral watson has to sign off. i assume -- continue to have at-

voice. there are certainly technical questions that bp can and should answer. the citizens of the gulf and the american people are owed an explanation from bp of what they are seeing in what is going on. >> good to be a little more specific about the president's trip tomorrow, what his goals are? what does he hope to accomplish and bring home? >> as i said, i think evaluating on the ground every effort of the response, both on the surface of the water and the internal damage that has been done, but also the economic damage that is being done in the gulf to small business owners

everywhere down there. i think he will get a chance to talk to some of those folks and get a chance to talk directly with admiral allen again as well as understanding how each state in the gulf is implementing its own state response plan, and whatever concerns they have been wanting to augment the plan is developed by them for a spill. the president will want to hear in the update that is going on but also your directly from -- but also hear directly from non elected individuals who are also suffering firsthand.

>> one quick question on the flotilla. before this incident happened, the it u.s. government urged israel to exercise caution and restraint. >> there are a lot of questions that you all may have that may be helped by the investigation the united states has called for. we would continue to encourage israel while maintaining a blockade not to have -- none of us want a repeat of what happened. >> in the president's meeting -- >> i think there is a rielle from our office that will go out discussing efforts that the administration has made along the border with the national

guard. and other devices to strengthen border security. obviously a long discussion about comprehensive immigration reform, which you heard the governor discuss, which is the only way we are going to solve this crisis. he is not going to be solved by one at the alone the is not going to be sought by one method alone. i have not had a chance to talk to anybody. >> on china's decision to rescind the invitation to secretary gates, do you see that as a direct results of the taiwan arms sale?

>> i would direct you to the department of defense on that. >> does it have implications for u.s.-china relations? >> it is countries that disagreed b.g.e. if two countries disagree on arms sales, and countries like china and the united states are going to have times in which whether it is north korean sanctions in front of the un last year or iran sanctions in front of the un this year, where we agree, there will be issues that we disagree on. that is what you have in international relations. >> does the president believe everything should be on the table in regards to [unintelligible] does that include the possibility they could

recommend the risk of drilling in deep water to great and it should be stopped? >> i think the president would want to be insured, as he certainly said in meetings, that at the very least, you have to have a plan -- a credible plan for responding to what potentially could happen, to ensure that you can stop something that you start, which 45 days later, we know bp is not showing good results on. i will say this. there are thousands of wells in the gulf, as we have slowed deep water permits, we have continued exploratory drilling in shallow water. that continues, and they are continuing to evaluate permits to drill in shallow water. the last time i saw the number

was around 60% of our oil that was imported from overseas. we have to break our dependence on foreign oil. the president outlined a comprehensive strategy that included more drilling. we are going to have to take steps to break our dependence on foreign oil. we have invested in a whole host of clean energy products through the recovery act. at the same time, we are all still driving cars. >> if they were to come back and say that drilling is just too dangerous -- >> i think the president has been very candid in both asking this commission to look at, not just the companies, but obviously he has not spare the government on this as well, in

terms of ensuring that there is a regulatory framework that works for the american people. again, there are thousands of wells out there that are producing oil that we are going to use right now. the commission has a lot of brett in dealing with an examination that regulatory framework. >> do you have any guidance on when -- >> in the next couple of days. they are finishing that up now. one question that will look at or the 33 current permits that had been frozen. >> he said earlier that you are very confident that the u.s. will be able to get an iran

sanctions resolution through to the un. [unintelligible] >> i have not spoken with each of the 15 members of the un security council. the president and the team remain confident that we start with the p5 plus one and believe that when that resolution is voted on, likely within the next week, that we will have a number that will pass that resolution. >> jessica something about the american that was killed in the plot to -- just something about the american that was killed in the flotilla. was the president angry? >> i was told that he expressed his condolences. >> are there offers that have

been made to clear the primary [unintelligible] they know about? can we expect that the white house staff will continue to work on that as a possible means of preventing [unintelligible] >> i would draw you to the circumstances we have talked about in each one of those cases. >> those circumstances are not likely to be repeated? >> i would point to the fact pattern of each one. >> the solution to the immigration problem should be border security first and then immigration policy. >> i think the president believes that those things have to happen together. if there was one solution to

this crisis, my guess is somebody would have either tried it are done it long ago. we know that is not the case. i think the president has outlined his beliefs on this. his record in the senate demonstrates this, and the work he has done here to encourage a bipartisan solution to a very emotional issue is something he continues to work on. >> on north korea, the u.s. has been enlisting economic sanctions [unintelligible] will the u.s. continued to provide humanitarian aid? >> let me check with nsc. i will double check on that. >> on the national guard troops heading down to the border,

response to the arizona immigration law as part of the -- a plan that had been discussed since last year. what happened to make him think the border was not secure enough right now? >> i don't think this is a problem -- if you go back several administrations, you see that it different times there have been more national guard on the border. during the clinton ministration, four different times they move members of the national guard to the border. several different times during the bush administration. obviously, what has -- what president calderon has done to fight crime and gangs is something that has caused increased violence as well. >> [unintelligible]

>> it is an israeli investigation. that is my understanding. >> i said to days ago that it could include international participation. >> do you know anything about timing? or talking about a week? >> i don't know. >> the indonesian trip is still on schedule? >> yes. as i said earlier, if anything changes, we will let you know. >> did you say how the meeting it with governor brewer came about? >> i think she requested the meeting. i don't know when she requested. i saw an e-mail several days

ago that we were having that meeting. >> why did the president decided it wanted to go down there? >> you cannot deal with the emigration issue without seeing what is happening along the border. surly, arizona is a big part of that. arizona has taken, because of the lack of federal response, has pointed to state efforts that the president's beliefs could be harmful and the justice the firm is evaluating that law for further action. i don't think you are going to deal with comprehensive immigration reform in the circumstances on the border without the language arizona. -- without dealing with arizona. >> even after seeing governor brewer come back out, did

anything actually get accomplished there? the spec -- do you expect to see follow-up with her? this thing actually happened? -- did anything actually happen? >> maybe i am going to the wrong meetings. there are dewpoints that she has, and they were clearly expressed in your signature on a lot about how we deal with immigration. as was said earlier, she has a point of view that you have to do border security first. the president has to be that we have to have koreans of

immigration reform. i saw it -- that we have to have comprehensive immigration reform. i think one of the results of the meeting she things will be better communication between the administration and her state. that is always a positive development. the president has talked about this at the republican caucus and here at the white house. john mccain was very instrumental in getting immigration to the point that it was in 2005 through 2007. i doubt we will get comprehensive immigration reform if we do not have john mccain doing what he believes then reject what he believed in in those years. she is the governor of that state, and hopefully she will lead both the senators of arizona and throughout the country know that the bette -- the way to best deal with

immigration reform is to do it comprehensively on a federal level. >> when it comes to the obama's planning their summer, is there any talk of them perhaps vacationing on a gulf beach? >> i have not been involved in their august plants. i don't have an answer. >> you said it was in the president's interest to see that supporters of his are not in a political conflict. does that mean he is fully committed to campaign for an supporting congressman meek, the certain democratic nominee for the senate in florida? >> he supports his campaign for senate, guess. we are supportive of congressman meek.

>> i forwarded you my correspondence from kbr, the spinoff company from halliburton that won a bid in a competitive contract and obtained an apparent no bid contract. can you address that? >> it appeared as if the contract was retained after a competitive bidding process, which i think is consistent with everyone's viewpoint. i don't know don'tdod as anything else to offer on that. glaxo you do not see is contradicting the president's statement? >> i do not. >> can you break down $59 million for us in a way that we can extrapolate the rate at which the government is spending money and billing bp?

>> do you know the sum total of the costs incurred this far? >> give me one second. [laughter] >> we heard the president say over and over around the country in speeches where he decries the cult of washington business as usual. your defense is essentially that this is washington, business as usual. does that undercut his larger argument? >> the ethics laws that we have that our administration runs by, the transparency of allow you to

understand who comes into this white house, today meet with and when they come, not taking political contributions during the campaign from lobbyists and pacs are differences in the way that washington works. those are efforts we are quite proud of. >> we are talking about the optics of the situation. >> what i just outlined are executive orders and decisions that the president madethat thelaws. >> -- decisions that the president made that are not laws. >> they have an opinion about romanov? >> i have not talked to him about that. >> you ticked off a bunch of the

things you guys have been doing and you did not mention guantanamo. where does that stand? >> report was recently sent to congress and recently made public of the evaluations that were done of the inmates at the guantanamo prison. i have not heard any updates on decisions about criminal trials. i have not heard that. >> does the news about a death of an american changed the white house's perspective? as you know the turks were the most vocal in criticizing the response from the white house. is there in anything about making another statement are

weighing in somehow? >> i think our statement and the actions of the security council, and the president had a good conversation today is a go with the prime minister. i think it is important that a be head to understand exactlyon what the facts are. >> center web -- senator webb outlined -- is the president still committed to the dialogue with burma's military government, and is consideration being given to the special envoy?

>> i do not have a lot of information on that. >> is listed the number of things you are prepared to do. is there anything you want to accomplish before the visit of the russian president that is expected later this month? >> i don't think anything legislatively prior to that. we have certainly send the new start treaty and the material up to the senate just as it has been done in russia, and expect that we will continue to make progress and see that that treaty is ratified by the end of the year. >> i understand that the white house wanted to avoid a costly primary race. [unintelligible]

people of this state who actually wanted a choice for their candidate. >> what is the question? >> what kind of message is sent to the voters in the state who want a choice of candidate? >> obviously, we have had a primary, and that has been done. again, the president is supportive of, as we said months ago, supportive of incumbent senator michael bennett, somebody who has done groundbreaking work, first as a superintendent, and is involved in a whole host of things that the president is supportive of, particularly as it relates to ethics.

>> the bush ethics lawyer actually defended the practice, that you are defeating the purpose when you are not giving people a choice. >> each individual state decides how vacancy is going to be filled. i am not going to get into those 50 estate decisions. i will say this. [laughter] i am speaking with the full weight of the federal government, for what that is worth. i hope that baseball awards a

perfect game to that picturtche. we are going to work on an executive order. i have a 6-0 right now who is playing baseball. -- i have a 6-year-old right now who is playing baseball. i have missed his game. i missed his game last night, but i think everybody that watched what happened and understood, to watch an umpire take responsibility and to watch a pitcher do what he did, the type of sportsmanship that was exhibited there, i think that gives a lot of hard, whether you are a 6-0 just learning how to play baseball, or whether you

are someone like us who watches baseball for the sheer enjoyment of the game, it is tremendously hardening to see somebody understand that they made a mistake and somebody accept the apology for someone who made that mistake. i think that is a good lesssn in baseball and probably a good lesson in washington. thanks, guys. >> in a few moments, we'll have live coverage of the debate between the democratic candidates for governor in south carolina. in an hour, the head of the new cyber command talks about u.s. cyber security strategy. after that, arizona governor jim brewer in her meeting today with president obama on immigration. later, a briefing on the gulf