in just a moment, we will have that south carolina governor democratic primary debate. the south carolina primary is next tuesday. earlier this week we had the republican candidates. the republican mark sanford is term limited and is not running. . . the second of our two

gubernatorial debates sponsored by coastal carolina or france's mary university. the republican candidates met at francis marion. they are dr. jim rex, also state senator robert ford, and state senator vincent sheheen. let's give a welcome to all three candidates. tonight's debate features the panel that will ask a series of questions to the canada. the executive vice president and a professor of politics at coastal carolina university. tracey bridges, a reporter, and

our third panelist is anchor and reporter rusty ray. please welcome our panel. [applause] tonight's debate will focus on job creation and building long- term economic growth across south carolina. part one involves questions from the media panel and include questions that are submitted from viewers and readers of the morning news. each canada will have the opportunity to answer five questions posed by each panel member. the candidates will have one minute 30 seconds to answer the question. the other three candidates will have 30 seconds to rebukreviewee question. they drew lots to determine the order in which the candidates will answer the question. dr. rex is first.

>> as part of your jobs initiative, fre ged's, the extension of unemployment benefits, tuition reimbursement in high demand fields, work share options for employers, tax breaks and regulatory relief for small businesses, and the expansion of public transportation in rural areas for workers to get jobs, among other proposals. given that revenues are at best flat and probably diminishing over the next few years, and your proposals would add new costs to the budget, would you pay for these proposals for a tax increase or by budget cuts in other areas and if you propose to do with budget cuts, what specifically with those areas be? >> thank you. let me say first of all, thank you. some of you know this, i was the

first dean of educational and provost here. thank yo for outlining some of those approaches. south carolina has serious problems right now. we're going in the wrong direction with their economy and other areas. what we need is a comprehensive tax reform. every economist has looked at that has said that if south carolina will expand its base, we have $4 billion not collected for a variety of reasons. the special interest route -- groups have piled on over three or four decades. if we would do comprehensive reform and some of those exemptions make sense, they ought to stay in place. many make no sense or they did 30 years ago but they do not any longer. i believe we can generate more

revenue and have a more stable and predp@[p!le79g

>> putting it together, and my campaign manager -- so we got

that going. or i also want to make sure apart -- i along with the center resolved it this year. the purpose was to bring black and white citizens in south carolina to bring our state forward into the -- is my time up? i was just getting started. >> maybe you can continue in a moment. >> i have a somewhat distant -- approach to economic development in the state. i think it is important that we create wealth for south carolinans as well. we need a governor who is epersonally involved and has te energy and commitment to recruit business and industry into south carolina. i want to focus on small

business by creating small business an entrepreneurship. i have committed to travel to all 46 counties with the top economic advisers to assess the need, because we have to have one state strategy. >> the new normal that is beginning to evolve in terms of what this 21st century is going to look like, there are no shortcuts. . .

for increased jobs is in the health care economy. i have toward many hospitals and health facilities. i received support from the hospital association. i promoted a broader view of economic development. it includes the health care economy. if we train enough medical tech support, we can create jobs. we're bringing in nurses from out of state. that these communities could fill. >> during my first two years in office, i did more than 30 town

hall meetings around the state and i am almost finished with 46 counties and 46 days. i have been in these counties consistently for over three and half years. education and training is a big part of it. healthcare is i have a daughter who is a nurse practitioner and we have to do more in that area. it goes back to having a vision for where south carolina needs to be in terms of having a livable wages and professional occupations that build our middle-class in south carolina. >> thank you. >> we're facing $3.5 billion [unintelligible] and that means a lot of suffering. we got to have money in -- when we take off in january, we need to havv the money. we need to have it then and there. i want to make sure we have a massive education plan to

educate our students in south carolina. we have wind turbines and [unintelligible] that are being built. we will attract 35,000 jobs. there will be statewide for the state of south carolina. >> thank you. >> senator ford. the greater myrtle beach area is trying to maintain its reputation as a destination for family vacations. do you think video poker which is the focus of your economic development plan and other forms of gaming help or hurt that effort? >> you used that argument against me with casino gaming that brought a lot of revenue and now you got rid of poker, you and the supreme court. one poker was alive and well, it

was second. thousands of jobs, billions of dollars flowing to south carolina. it got rid of it and now we have been suffering. everyone in line for revenues. the different universities and schools and if it were not for her robert ford, -- robert ford, there would not be in education lottery. i heard the same argument then. it will bring all this destruction. it did not. that money is going to give scholarships and medical university gets 10. because of the gaming, we were able to do something for education. we would not have the money to do that. that is my priority. >> we differ on this aspect of

his program. i do think that we need to look at tourism which is part of the question was asked. as part of economic development strategy, we moved farther down the road. i do not think it is considered a part of economic development as it should be. i am committed as governor to doing that. a part of that is promoting it. it is in our best interest of we have more people come to the coast and spend more dollars. part of that is committing those dollars to promote towards south carolina, not only on the coast but the interior where there are many opportunities. >> the image of the grand strand cannot be separated from that image of the state. we need to have a state that is viewed more positively than it is right now. it is viewed as a state that honors its natural resources, has a beautiful, clean place to live in as well as to visit. i think one of the problems with senator ford's proposal is in

the past, we talked about these income sources supplementing our income. our legislation has taken this dollars and put them in the place of state dollars that should have been committed. >> for those of you watching on c-span, the grand strand is the north coastal area of south carolina, stretching from north little beats down to georgetown. >> our next question comes from the voice of the loder project. considering the oil disaster, what would you do to produce a production of great energy in south carolina, such as wind turbines off the coast? >> i have been involved in this over the last few years. it is a large part by platform. what we have done this year, i sponsored legislation in the past but focuses on rehabilitating the energy in

inefficient homes. there is a greatly to job creation. it will create 4000 jobs and this allows our countries and co-ops to loan dollars to renovate their homes. saving energy costs while creating over 4000 jobs in the near term and hopefully 8000 ayalon term in our area. secondly, i want to mention the possibility of biofuel in the rural areas. a tremendous job creator in areas that do not have job creation. the third quarter for area that we have potential is in offshore wind. this is an example of failed leadership. north clack -- north carolina and terrodelaware [unintelligib] we relied on the folks in charleston to come up with a plan and received grant money but we can do more. >> i think we do have a wind planned installed. -- plan installed.

one of the areas i would mention is nuclear energy. we're in the early stages of nuclear energy in this country. south carolina is the leader. we're willing to third in terms of generation. half of our electricity comes from nuclear powee. along with the wind, by a fuel, a solar, we need to take that one forward and make sure we remain the leader. >> you have to have that stimulus and my program plan would do that. i have provided that to south carolina already. we have nine european countries signed on to do wind turbines. i tolok a bold position and went on to help raise the project and make the general assembly to

keep it and because of [unintelligible] we now have nine countries signed off to do wind turbines. that is what you call leadership and courageous leadership. >> thank you. >> you advocate the institution of a work share option for south carolina companies. employers can reduce hours and offer partial benefits to workers instead of layoffs or furloughs. the workers could be eligible for partial unemployment benefits. how do you think this would croci if carolina industry be on the roster of businesses calling south carolina home? is this a viable option for small businesses? >> i do. i talk to so many business leaders. they have this terrible option of laying off workers and in some cases, they are some of their most experienced, highly trained workers because of the downturn.

they worry about getting them back. when the economy turns around. this gives them the option of choosing to cut back. on the amount of hours and allows the state to work -- make up some of that difference. instead of paying unemployment benefits, you have a person who was partially unemployed. this has been done in 13 other states. it held and it helped the employee and the state by cutting back on the cost of unemployment. it has allowed industry to be more flexible. when we talked industry about why they should partner with south carolina, this could be one of the creative flexibility as we have as the economy gives then flows and as their business tries to be competitive and maintain their competitiveness. >> senator ford. >> next year we got $3.5 million shortfall and we are laying off people. we had better saihave some reve.

i am planning on putting a $250 million in government to make sure that every employee starts off at $11 an hour. the same with the state. if you make theless than 50,000, you get an automatic 5% raise. i am bringing the revenue in. i would like to beg my friends to bring me some revenue and let me know what you want to be governor without revenue. >> the best jobs plan is to keep employees employed. that is why i fought to bring in stimulus dollars so we could keep thousands of cheap -- teachers on the job. they probably would have lost their unemployment. we also have that unique dr opportunity.

help people who are out of work, match up with new jobs. that is important to consider as we move forward. >> thank you. the next question for senator robert ford. >> as --senator ford? -- is this question for senator ford? can you speak to pensioninstance you kept jobs? >> bi lost time in chryslyer because of the confederate flag. we were able to convince [unintelligible] the wind turbines like it talked

about earlier. i was involved in that project to defend that project. that is, district but i defend the project and that will bring 4000 jobs. >> in charleston county, would you relocate boeing or video poker machines? >> both. we need both. $3.5 billion of budget, and thousands of teachers laid off and employees. we could get that money right away. how the one of them is considering some form of gaming. north carolina just passed a poker plan. we had better get some money

here and get it quick because you'll be crying in a few days of the fact that we do not have no money to pay you. we have to have some money and gaming is the only thing left. >> we will likely be crying anyway. >> not if i am governor. you will have the money. >> i have been involved in numerous economic development projects in my senate district. i would tell you i am not responsible for the businesses that have located there. it is a genuinely team effort. i worked closely with my economic development director and have been involved with expansion in the persian county and was meeting with an employer that relocated their who was thinking about expanding their. we have been involved in helping to build incentive packages that bring companies to south carolina. we supported the incentive that

brought going to south carolina. >> about a year ago, there is a company in barnwell county that is north america's largest manufacturer of vending machines. they wanted to decide where they would consolidate. i was asked by the team to call this ceo of this company. we have an education system that is on the move and that would work with his employees if they chose south carolina. the day after i called, they chose south carolina. it is the first time anyone had called him for relocation decision. >> we will keep it going on in the stretch. >> in your economic development and jobs plan, you said smaller and rural counties cannot be left behind. you will create an infrastructure bank to provide funds.

how do you plan to work them worker -- help the worker in marion county that was laid off? >> the key there will be the new department of workforce. the matching of employees to jobs is something that has not been done all that well. we have the opportunity to control this agency by appointing the director. the second thing that is key is the use of our technical college system. we have one of the best technical college systems in the country. there is potential to match employees with employers through training for those employers. >> one of our problems in south carolina and the county is we have a large number, somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000 workers who are undertrained and under skilled. it makes it difficult.

what we have to do is help those people move up their skill level. i have recommended we pay the $80 g.d.ged fee. we will to have an office of job creation to focus in on how we bring industries from other states and countries in. >> senatthe reason they are surviving is some people like myself were bold enough to make sure that our technical schools got [unintelligible] i would like to remind everybody, we're talking about $3.5 billion next year. thousands of employees laid off. the next governor needs to have a plan from the first day running to save the state and

those thousands of people who are not going to have a job and income for their families. i am waiting for some answers. >> this question comes from the voice of the voters and the readers of the morning news. the thing people have received -- who have received government assistance in the form of welfare should be drug tested? >> i do not understand what that has to do with the governor of south carolina. those people receiving welfare, they would have to receive it -- i am planning on having some jobs for them so they can work instead of getting government benefits. we need to understand if we do not [unintelligible] those kinds of questions

[unintelligible] i am an elected official. my job is to look out for the interests of the public. it so happens that i am in south carolina. my job is to make sure that every segment of south carolina enjoys a decent standard of life. when you have this kind of questions and those kinds of games, it means that the $3.5 billion that we should be concerned with, we would not be concerned with. our mind is on trivial stuff. i am talking about how the media made politics altria and it is not. -- trivia and it is not. >> just because someone's grandmother or grandfather or wherever got laid off is no reason why you should require them to submit to drug test. that does not make logical sense to me. >> i agree. it is further degradation.

when the gaming industry does not appear and professor dyer gets laid off, he should not be drug tested. [laughter] [applause] that is not our problem. we have a lot of people in south carolina that want to go back to work. they do not need to have this further humiliation. >> their question is for senator vincent sheheen. >> part of your plan to create jobs and maximize economic growth, you intend to overhaul the department of commerce if elected. what would you do differently than secretary taylor and his staff are doing, and what specific types of businesses and industries would you seek to attract? >> this is an important question. these decisions have to be made

from the start. the type of person you name as secretary of commerce. it is key that it is not a friend of the governor. it is important that it is someone with professional experience in economic development. it is important that the secretary the charged with recruiting industry. we know that that can work. and have a chief of staff for someone else in the department that runs the day-to-day affairs of the agency. you need that figurehead who was out there recruiting business into south carolina. the department of commerce has seen its budget cut. we need to fund the department of commerce because the investment is good. it does not cost that much money and it is not a big agency. this is one of those agencies that need to couple of million dollars to make happen what we need to happen. >> we need to create what i call an office of job creation. a dozen people and i am not

talking about a big bureaucracy. these are selected to work with the department of commerce to develop five regional portfolios. and then to find those prospects that a line with those portfolios. the other thing is we need to have a governor who has been a ceo, who has managed people, programs, and dollars, so that talks to a ceo, he is understands their language and their responsibilities and what it takes to attract them. >> we -- i have been making an announcement to have workshops in different parts of south carolina and [unintelligible] i am not governor. i do not think i would not put

that burden on one person. i have a good relationship with the general assembly and i would make sure that industry is located in six different locations. it will be off and running on the first day. >> dr. rex, you advocated an overhaul of the commissioner office of job development and workforce. many are being -- collecting unemployment. you require accountability. how would you make that system work more effectively and make the commission accountable? >> we need to look at where our job needs are. we have some jobs that are not being filled. we also have some employers who are still breaking the law by employing illegal immigrants. we need to look at our unemployed workforce.

the jobs we have are not goingog unfilled. if there are jobs, we need to put those persons in a training program and they did i get that training wwthout a commitment. they lose their unemployment benefits if they reneged on a agreement. you can build in a series of carrots and sticks not just for the agency bud selig carolinians 21 training and want to take jobs but who are in the wrong field or in some cases, the wrong geography. the state could let them move. that is part of the accountability we could instill. >> i help a lot of people in that situation. what happened is we had three

commissioners elected from the general assembly. since there were members of the general assembly, when the general assembly could not come up with jobs in hard times, they passed the buck and at the public thinking the reason we do not have jobs is because those three commissioners revamped the the agency. on the floor of this and that [unintelligible] the assembly passing the buck because they cannot come up with job programs. >> much of what it sounds like is what the general assembly did. i was happy to be part of that and making that happen this past year. the goal was to make it more accountable so that but passing would not occur where the governor blames the general assembly and the general assembly blames the commissioners. what was done was appropriate. the governor names the director

of that agency instead of having people elected by the general assembly to control that agency, the governor handles that. the requirements were tendered for who was eligible for benefits so we could make sure that those who deserve the benefit got them and get them in time. we're behind technologically in the way our agencies operate. we have got to get ahead. >> we do not have any jobs. >> your question is for senator ford. >> that is right. >> i will ask it. >> many candidates agree that focusing efforts on improving education is key to maximizing the state's economic development. the advocation in the face of

a massive budget cuts complicates the need for higher salaries. how can you balance educational improvement by spending more money? keeping the other state demands a priorities? >> we have to keep that $3.5 billion, we have to make that up. to make it up with a massive program like i am introducing. the only reason i am running for governor is because for 12 years, i try to get the general assembly -- we need to replace the money we lost to video poker. you are trying fees. that will not fly. the only way you can do that now is through gambling. south carolinians are blessed with the best highway system in

the country. under my plan, $300 million in public education. a five to one ratio for kids and a 15 to one ratio for smaller classes in the public schools. how can i do this? i am bringing in the money. you have to bring home the bacon. this is not a dream. this can actually happen. athey have no money. >> you have 30 seconds. >> many of the things i think need to happen will not happen until we begin to grow out of our budget deficit. there are things we can do to help that. one thing i am proud to have accomplished was raise the cigarette tax 50 cents, a substantial increase. i proposed raising the national average. we fought for years and that will bring in $120 million and

three to one matchess to be truly successful in the public -- program we need, we need comprehensive tax reform. that looks at how we can broaden the taxes will keeping rates low. >-- while keeping rates low. >> these timlin were late because the or part of the budget that was passed. it is funding public education next year the same way it was founded in 1995. we have enough fuel [unintelligible] we will between 5000 and 7000 educators between last year and this year. talking it does not do it anymore. education has to be a priority even well we tried to grow the economy. these children have one childhood and they cannot do it over. it has to be a priority.

>> question for senator sheheen. >> you deemed low cost power to be critical. you do not mention nuclear energy. given that half of south carolina's energy comes from nuclear plants, i think we have four, are you in favor of expanding our use of nuclear energy? >> i am. let me respond to something dr. rex said. i voted against the budget was passed today and it is one of the reason i stayed. it was important for us to be there to vote against that and make a statement and hold a line. i found to fund -- fought to fund public education. we have a good track record.

it is important we pressure the federal government to solve where the waste will go. it is critical that happens. as we talk about alternative energy and new energy that does not limit co2 gases, it is important that nuclear be part of that mix. >> as i said earlier, this is an area where we are already a leader in -- and we have to maintain our leadership. nuclear power is a short to medium term answer. long term, we need to work on these green technology, these grenoble's that will be part of this new normal. -- renewables that will be part of the new normal. our universities and technical colleges will have to give us the kind of knowledge industry workers we will need if we are going to be a leader in some of these new green technology niches. >> i serve on the energy commission that is chaired by

chairman ranks. -- rankins. luke has done a wonderful job. it would be a[unintelligible] >> rusty ray will ask the next question. >> an ever shrinking county budget threatens major funding of the world transportation provider. almost on a yearly basis. there is a lot [unintelligible] that has not passed final reading. how would your transportation initiative provide private funding to offset any lack of for constant reduction in public funding? >> we have a short-term problem

and a long-term problem. the grand strand needs to look at how we can tap into the federal dollars that are available to put in high-speed rail systems. charleston has made an application to do that. grand strand needs to do the same thing. i will support that as governor. we ought to add to the i-73 plan infrastructure for this high-speed rail system. european nations and asian nations have these trains in place. the public loves and they are safe and affordable. many of these countries, if you are traveling 500 miles or less, you use that. that is a long-term solution. the short term, the state needs to step up and help local communities with these costs partly through this comprehensive tax reform have mentioned earlier. we're talking about an infrastructure bank that would put facilities, i can envision a

bank that would help with transportation. we have so many rural areas that have absolutely inadequate transportation. it is not just the grand strategy. it is throughout the state. >> senators rankin and elliot [unintelligible] they fought hard and they got it. we did the same thing in charleston. i will set aside $250 million to be set aside for those types of projects. i have to billion dollars to play with when i become governor. 250 million to county and local government. that is we need to support my plan. >> there are many opportunities

to understand why our government does and does not work. the governor named it nonow thed of the [unintelligible] we need to have a governor that is committed to other types of transportation. they can access federal dollars. we already have the state's infrastructure. it was used to build projects. it is important as dollars be leveraged as much as possible, not only for roads but mass transit. >> euronext question is for senator 4. >> -- your next question is for senator ford. >> the majority of video poker players were motorists passing through the state or short-term visitors to the borders of south carolina.

65% of the video poker machines were located along interstate highways. would your legislation limit machines to a certain distance from interstate highways or certain distance from the interstate -- from the state boundary? >> no. the only stipulation would be churches and schools. the state would be wide open. it is wide open now. poker never did really leave here. you have more machines than ever before. we're not taxing it. the supreme court made it illegal. the state went down when we did that. we cannot support the basic needs of the citizens of this state. that is why i chose to run for governor. i have been begging them to their revenue. it was clemson university that dispel the rumors that everyone was spreading in the media about

these people playing poker and they cannot afford it. there was an in-depth study and i want everyone to read that. especially media and professor tribe's. you would know why as a 45 year veteran in public service, i would never do nothing to hurt people. poor people are good, clean, gaming industry. we need the money. $3.5 billion shortfall, that means suffering by thousands and thousands of people in the state. >> i think a better approach to build wealth is to look at what had worked already in to build on that. small business creates 60% of the jobs and i propose creating a division of fenty partnership. it goes into smaller and medium-

sized counties and helps to build a plan. it helps to implement their plan. small business is a key to success. we need to do something to promote it. >> i thought only republicans attacked education and the liberal media. this is turning into a video poker discussion. i do not want to spend a lot of time about it anymore. i want to say something about the entrepreneurship. i do not think government is the best way to promote entrepreneurship. it is almost an oxymoron. fresno state has a good model. part of the graduation requirements is to start a new business in that state. we ought to do this seems -- the same thing. >> would you be for casino

gaming and video poker? >> at a. >> -- no. >> we had 100 people submit thhir questions. what would your remedy for the education funding crisis going on with the [unintelligible] >> we got a number of sponsors. legislation was named begin at ten. we do the reform we talked about but we have student centered funding. we get rid of this antiquated funding that has created these unjust disparities. what we have lived with for decades. a child's education depends upon

there's a code. this funding would have the state stepped up and provide a larger percentage of the funding frrm public education. it would go to every child a matter where they lived so we would get rid of the inequities and there would be a couple of weightings. one for kids who are gifted, special needs, and poverty. districts who have large percentages of kids in poverty would get more. that cycle is holding us back as much as any single dynamic. we need to fund public education differently. we have not been able to get through the legislature. >> that is why you need a source of revenue. otherwise, we could dream that and we should not play with the

lives of the citizens of this day. we owe it to them to come up with a plan. i have a plan. the stimulus program that we fought for. the money is gone. what we got to do now as of carolinians, those of us who are elected to public office, especially from the state perspective. you have to come up with a source of revenue. i am the only one who has a specific source of revenue. give me something to look at. if you give me something to look at, all the questions are [unintelligible] but we got to replace $3.5 billion. the only game in town is my game. if someone has specifics that is better, i am waiting. >> thank you.

it is a hard act to follow. the key to changing and improving the way fund public education is equity funding for schools. it is something i have been passionate about and i have worked on and is linked to a comprehensive tax reform. many of the things that were mentioned were included in the legislation i had on the floor of the senate which we have been able to move forward on that. we got it as far as we did without a governor. it is morally wrong that a child's opportunity is dictated where they are born or where they go to school. it is not in our best interest. the state will step up and play a larger role in funding many of our rural counties. there are places we have to look for revenue. one was the cigarette tax and i was proud to lead that. we need to create jobs in the

state. the first priority has to be creating jobs. for us to provide top-quality education, we have to have the tax revenue. >> it is time for closing argument. but will start with -- we will start with dr. jim rex. >> thanks for being here, the audience and the viewers. we need a different type of leadership. we relied for too long on career politicians who fail this. we hear about this gridlocked legislature. i introduced this or i introduced that. that matters very little. we need our results. we need someone who has had the executive experience to get measured results. i have proven over three and half years we can move a public school system forward in the

worst recession we have seen with the government who has been hostile or indifferent to public education. i want to say that i have enjoyed the debates with these tillman. we have done this many times since this campaign started. i hope the citizens of south carolina have netted the difference between the way democrats compete in the way republicans compete. this is not the way to compete on the democratic side. i want to make naotheanother co. it has been an honor to be with you. it will be an honor to be your governor. >> i have a lot of love and respect to my colleagues to the

left and right. i was at the university of south carolina yesterday and a student asked me, how do you assume you can win in south carolina? the latest poll, i had a whole lot to do with. we had a video poker vote and it passed. we have an education lottery and we used video poker money to fund the referendum and we got a past once again. i was old enough to get it passed. when we went as democratic [unintelligible] i helped him raise $5 million from the video poker industry. and want to bring the state together. black and white citizens who have not had a governor in the state history.

when we get governors and most elected officials, they tend to tend to for the people who finance their campaigns. the public never gets benefits. i want to be that governor that benefits the masses. once and for all in south carolina. >> thank you. [applause] >> and now senator vincent sheheen. >> have -- i have enjoyed being with you. i want to make south carolina go forward again. i want to work to create jobs for our state and i want to get back on the offense in public education. i have lived in camden muy entire life. i want my kids to return there and be successful once they get

out of high school and go through college. i group the son of a schoolteacher and a son of a small businessman. i am passionate about education. i have enjoyed these debates and i have known dr. rex for a number of years. i believe this is the way the public discussion should be conducted. this is the way that a public debate should occur. i am proud of what we have b done over many months. i have worked hard to become south carolina's next governor. for a democrat to win, you have to work extremely hard. regardless of the outcome, i will continue to work with these gentlemen and work to better south carolina along with the folks of this audience and many of you watching i. >> we want to thank the staff

for this debate. please vote next tuesday at the primary. have a great night and good night from coastal carolina. >> the head of the new cyber command talks about cyber security strategy. arizona gov. jan brewer discussing immigration. following that, admiral thad allen's briefing on the gulf oil spill. legal aspects of the oil spill from an attorney involved in the exxon valdez accident in 1989. >> this president is going to be impeached. woodward said we can never use that word around this newsroom lest anyone think we have some kind of an agenda. the awe of that moment stays

with me. >> search for water gate with c- span video laubelibrary. c what other key players have said about the break-in and cover-up. explore washington your way. the c-span video library free online. . .

it wasn't clear to some members of congress. it just took a hell of a lot longer than it should have. it was obvious that he was the right -- right man at the right time, a time when we very much need this. now, this is going to be far more traumatic i think for n.s.a. then it's going to be for the nation to have a cyber command. this is an agency -- somebody this morning said, used to say, no such agency, n.s.a., be used

to stand for and, of course, this is an agency that does so many crucial things for the country but it has to by necessity be in a reserved capacity, in a role in terms of public acknowledgment. and now all of a sudden to be thursdayt into the limelight on what probably is the largest and most public security issue we face is going to be a very wrenching thing for an agency. no small matter because we do not have the kind of consensus, the national consensus, that we need at this crucial hour. for the last several years, we've had a great debate in this country that has not resolved itself in the right way. we have two contending priorities. we want the government to protect us and americans want to be protected from their government. you know, these are two thing that's have been with us for 250 years. and we've worked that out. we had a working formula that resolved all of that, but that

consensus broke down badly in the last decade. and so we have general alexander walking in to probably the most crucial job that we need to have done at a time when we don't have -- we the policy leaders, don't have consensus on how to manage this. this is going to be the great challenge. so fortunately, we have a man of his talent and his experience that's going to help us. he not only has to build a new organization but he also has to help build the confidence and the consensus in the united states that we need this role, and it's a crucial role for the country. so i'm very grateful general alexander that you would join us. this has been long in coming. you see the depth of interest in this topic and we rather than my delaying it, we look forward to hearing your words and then i hope you will give us the benefit also of sharing q & a and we will take care of those questions for you.

thank you for coming. >> he must have been standing on something, because this is way up there. thanks for that introduction and your leadership and service to our nation. not only the department of defense and to the center of strategic and international studies. you helped spark the discussion in the 1990's under the clinton administration and with experts like jim lewis, csis continues to show leadership. securing cyber space for the 44th presidency served as a key thread for continuity across two administrations and really set the foundation for crafting this administration's strategy for cyber and security. thank you as well for the opportunity to speak her today. this is my first public

engagement since have i been promoted and assuming the command of u.s. cyber command. i'm 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 com than here at csis. but before i talk about u.s. cyber com and focus on the defense department, let me state up front that cyber security is a team sport. i see a lot of the team out here in the audience. we can't do this alone. within the government, howard schmidt has the lead for coordinating the departments an3 cybersecurity. he has done a superb job and has been great to work with. for the team at d.h.s., phil ridinger, admiral mike brown and others have been great partners on a set of very complex issues. all of us in government

recognized that government cannot do this without the help of industry, academia 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 the partnership as we could electively 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. hammery said, a ttsk long in the making and longer overdue. i think it was a brief confirmation process that we went through. that was a joke. i'm sorry. no more jokes. in 2005, the director of n.s.a. was the director of n.s.a. and commander of joint fugsal component command net warfare. the commander of the defense information systems agencies was

dual added, commander of the joint task force global operations. in late 2008, as a result of a series intrusion, into our classified networks, the secretary of defense decided to place the joint task force global network ops under my operational control as a commander of the joint functional component command net warfare, recognizing both the imperative for better synchronization, synchronizing of offensive and defensive cyber capabilities as well as the need to leverage n.s.a.'s intelligence capabilities to understand our threat and the ability to respond to it. last june the secretary of u.s. cyber command to further of strengthen this model and streamline the command and control of our military's cyber capabilities. since that time, we have been leaning forward and building an organization and a mission

alignment that is more integrated, synchronized and effective in the support of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, coast guard, men and civilians. on may 21, that came together in the activation of u.s. cyber command. we at cyber command are responsible day to day for directing the operations of defense in the department of defense information networks and for the systemic adaptive planning integration and synchronization of cyber activities and when directed under the authority of the president, the secretary of defense, and the commander of u.s. strat com, for conducting full spectrum military cyber space operations to ensure u.s. and allied freedom of action in cyberspace. that is quite a mouthful. i have difficulty saying it. i'm an army officer. reading it difficult. partly it means that u.s. cyber command will centralize command

of military cyberspace separations, strengthen d.o.d. cyber space capabilities and integrate and bolster d.o.d. cyber expertise. deputy secretary of defense william lynn explained last week we will lead the day-to-day defense of all military networks, support military and counterterrorism missions and under the leadership of the department of homeland security assist our government civil authorities and industry partners. as secretary lynn put it, the key part of cyber command is the linking of intelligence, offense and defense under one roof. that's simple. well, actually no. 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 would like to sketch out some of our thinking on these interrelated set of issue that's we call cyberspace and how we hope to sort these issues, i hope, resolves some of the more urgent demand issues. cyberspace consists of vexingly complex systems that ship and store unimaginablely vast amounts of data. by 2015, the number of network 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, the group projects there will be 2.2 social network accounts worldwide and currently 2.4 billion instant messaging

accounts. by 2014, they scombroket there will be over 2.7 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 -- [laughter] i got all of the spam ones on 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 15% from other locations around the globe. in a sense we humans are tying together all of the libraries on our planet and making them accessible from everywhere instantly. the day of that common library conform to our health and contribute to our quality of life. tremendous opportunities for the future and tremendous vulnerabilities. our data must be protected. no one here or anyone else would consent to having all of their personal and family information stored in a place where any random stranger could rummage through it. no business or nonprofit enterprise and certainly no nation could long afford to leave its trade secrets, donor

lists or diplomatic bargaining positions lying around exposed. and that is what in esassistance happening more and more as ways we use to keep 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, awarenesses and practices of our agencies, firms, suppliers, schools, friends, neighbors, relatives and, well, all of us. cyberspace 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 and protecting it while safeguarding privacy and civil liberties is a national security priority.

the comprehensive national cyber initiative, which has basketball forged and implemented under two administrations now, is are guide for doing this. today our nation's interests are in jeopardy. the tech logic convergence of automated data process and telecommunications has boosted productivity and opportunity fwut 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 cyberspace. america's very wealth and strength make it a target in cyberspace 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 7 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, embedded processors and controllers in critical industries. that infrastructure is a sophisticated and robust -- it is sophisticated and robust but also has its weak points. dod systems are probed by unauthorized users approximately 250,000 times an hour. over 6 million times a day. and while our front-line defenses are up to this challenge, we still have to deveet too much of our time and

resources to dealing with relatively mundane problems such as poorly engineered software, missing 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 day the breaches verizon investigated last year -- and remember these were only reported cases, not all breaches, they found that criminal organizations often using custom-built malware, are able to breach virtually every single organization they choose. a relative handful of such

attacks accounted for the vast preponderance of the 285 million records that the verizon investigators determined to be compromised. and the main limitations on the abilities of these criminal organizations were common resources. they simply did not have the time and wear with all to reach all of the high-value targets they could have and thus they apparently concentrated on what they deemed the most profitable ones. those are just the criminal organizations. we should assume that foreign government actors in cyberspace 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 situational awareness. but trend the team should be evolving in other ways that should also give us concern.

a decade ago network penetration seemed targeted mostly at exploiting data. in the last few years, we saw the bar of conduct lowered for computer network attacks. in espn stonia in 2007 and in georgia in 2008, distributed denial of service attacks impeded government functions. as i told dr. hamre, i think they also delayed me getting here. now there are hints that some penetrations are targeting systems for remote sabotage. let me explain. estonia, georgia, were distributed denial of service attacks. once these attacks stopped, the information systems were able to continue on with their job. but the potential for sabotage and destruction is now possible and something we must treat very seriously. and these threats are serious. to deal with them will require common vision, unity of effort and a commitment of dedicated

resources. our department of defense must be able to operate freely and defend its resources in cyberspace. we will do this as we do it in the traditional military domains of land, sea, air and space but cyberspace is unique. it is a manmade 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 right user at the right time and the right level of protection. u.s. cyber command inables the defense department to better operate and protect our d.o.d. information networks and remains the focal point for military cyberspace operations in collaboration with other components of the u.s. government. its contribution represents a substantial share of the what the department offers as part of a whole government approach to

deter, detect and defend against emerging threats to our nation in cyberspace. 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 joint task force global network operations. recently, we established a single, colernt 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 ft. mead. 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 fields, are unsurpassed. this intellectual and technological capital is critical to the success of the entire u.s. government efforts in cyberspace. u.s. cyber command is a military

command that falls under title ten, but its business relies on the success of net speed intelligence, which is why cloketting 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 to minimize the effects of intelligence activities upon u.s. persons. n.s.a. also has an experience and energetic oversight both internally and from the department of justice, the fisa court, and from congress. this explains why collocation of cyber command with those same professionals is perhaps the best way to ensure the transparency of operation that's can affect u.s. person's data and the protection of privacy and civil liberties as our

military operations in cyberspace. as of may 21, u.s. cyber command also gained service elements to be boots on the ground in support of its mission. these include the army forces cyber command, the marine forces cyber command, the 24th air force, and the navy's tenth fleet, fleet cyber command under vice admiral barry mccullia, who i understand spoke to you just a few months ago. while technology is part of the solution, of course, but the key is people. and we superb people both at n.s.a. and u.s.a. cyber command. one of our greatest challenges will be successfully recruiting, training and training our cyber cadre to ensure we can sustain our ability to operate effectively in cyberspace for the long term. this is one of the key focus areas identified in the recent quad drenial defense review. the need to develop greater

cyber expertise, the q.d.r. identified three other key imperatives for operating effectively in cyberspace. one, we must develop a comprehensive approach to d.o.d. operations in sibe space. two, we must centralize command of cyber operations and, three, finally, we must enhance partnerships with other agencies in the government. this last point merits particular elaboration. 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. and 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 by those ending in the dot. we rely on private sectors and capabilities. hence ensuring that those partners and allies networks are secure is a key concern because the flow of information crossing these networks is significant and sensitive. our adversaries will find our weakest link and exploit it whether it is public or privately owned and operated. that being said, any efforts to secure d.o.d. mission critical networks will be carefully designed to avoid providing preferential treatment to any particular private sector company. perhaps most importantly this is an action 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 entechnical capabilities. we will pull together existing cyberspace resources to create

better synergy and synchronization of war fighting effects to defend d.o.d. information networks. we are integrating defense, offense, operations and will leverage technical capabilities to provide coherent effects to san francisco 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 would like to leave you with some thoughts on how i think we can translate these imperatives into mission success to operate effectively in cyberspace 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 common, shareable operating picture. we must share indications and 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 natural power tone sure that america and other nations can gain the benefits of free movement in cyberspace, continue to conduct international engagement in diplomacy efforts to improve global governments of this domain, review military doctrine and actions to ensure they are appropriate and effective. and considerable economic policy tools with the involvement of intelligence and law enforcement indices to dissuade those who seek to exploit cyberspace for a gain. to achieve these efforts we must recruit, educate, retain and attain a cadre of cyber experts who will be conducting seamlessly -- seamless

interoperability across a full sprecktrum of networks. finally, we must be able to operate and adapt to situations at net speed, leveraging technology for automattd, autonomous decision making. together n.s.a. and u.s. cyber command will be the intersection of military intelligence and information sharing capabilities vital to the nation's comprehensive cyber security strategy. we will perform this mission with your trust and confidence but we will only succeed by working as part of a coherent team. we will partner with all departments and agencies. we will actively engage all branches of government. we will exercise our powers and responsibilities under laws in ways designed to ensure that we are truly protecting, not infridging, 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 the national security issue with implications 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 cyberspace. 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 cyberspace issues. i look forward to the interchange and i thank you very much again for your attention. >> grafmente thank you, general alexander and congratulations on the fourth star.

if i could 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. >> hang on. you get a free mic out of all of this. >> thank you. one of the questions i keep getting asked is how do you streamline obtaining permission for cyber attack in time for it to be tactically relevant, particularly against faceless opponents? >> that's -- that is a difficult issue. i think the question -- the question i think everybody heard is how do you streamline your countertacks against c.n.a. attackers, especially if they're stateless.

i think i wro enlarge it to say if you can't attribute it, how do you do that? i think what we have to establish are clear rules of engagement that say what we can stop. now, there are things we can stop at the boundary, like an institution 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, a word of the standing rules of engagement that we have, do those comport with the laws, responsibility that's we have? can we clearly articulate those so people know and expect what will happen? i think we have to look at it in two different venues, what we're doing here in peace time and what we need to do in war time 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 digital internet and is now the command and control system which is now the pass which was our old push to talk radio. when somebody would jam it, you

would try to work through it. now are we going to do that in cyberspace? the answer is, i believe, by working through a set of standard rules of engagement you will have and our forces will have and we have yet to do that. that's something we have to take on. >> you see two sets of rules working on those sets? >> i do. they may all be in one set but those things you do in war time i think will be different than what you do in peace time. i had an opportunity in the hearing -- i say this with some level of humor, was asked this specific question by senator levin when we came up with three different menus, so how would cyber command act when we're at war with another country where both combatants are in one country and you could attribute the attack to your aggressor, your adversary and you would say i'm going to do these and i'm under one set of rules of

engagement. now what happens, that was case one. case two is what happens when the adversary uses a neutral country to bounce their attack through and that is a different set. and it's not unlike warfare where you have two -- have you 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 have to look at that in light of cyberspace. 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, and we talked about each one in a different case. 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 this those standing rules of engagement yet that we need and we're working through those with the u.s.d. policy and up through the

deputy's committees with the administration. >> i think we have harry and then the gentleman in brown. >> good morning, sir. hary ratigee from deloitte. many of us in this room have worked on operational pictures and such and during your comments you mentioned situational awareness is an area that definitely needs to be improved. i wonder if you couldn't just briefly describe perhaps where we are now with situation awareness and the areas that you would like to see improved in the future. >> i think in a nutshell the hard part is -- and i can give you an analogy here. i will use the national training center. in the national training center, one of the things they teach our land forces is how to see the battlefield and how to preact to different situations.

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 ircampaign against an adversary in a very quick battle. battalion on battalion, bra grade on brigade, where fights minal last four to six hours. understanding where your adversaries try to go, where reconnaissance goes, where his leading forces go and all of that, there's some of the stuff we do at the national training center. now, let's put it in cyberspace. we have no situational awareness. it's very limited. oftentimes the situational awareness is indeed forensics, which means that something has happened. we're now responding to that and we're saying, ok, something got through. how do you see your network? as you know as the former director of the defense systems agency, great agency, as you look at that and try to look at all of your networks, you didn't have realtime situational

awareness of those 7 million machines and all of your networks. and the consequence of that is it was almost policing after the fact versus mitigating it in realtime. so the require frment my perspective, we need realtime situational awareness in our networks to see where something bad is happening and to take action there at that time. that is both a coordination issue amongst the services and agencies and a situational awareness issue. we do not have a common operating picture for our networks. we need to get there. we need to build that. and i think many an industry would say, yep, we're working towards that but we don't have that. with the breadth that we need. now, if you take that to iraq and afghanistan, you would find the same things so we need to fix both. would i focus first on the war-fighting ones and then fix the second one, global one

second. >> let's get one on the other side of the room. >> good morning. i'm scott matthews, officer of technology, department of commerce. the question i have is regarding russia'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 could work? how would that impact your functions? >> let me take that in two parts. yes, no. no. let me elaborate if i could. i do think that we have to

establish the rules and what russia put forward is perhaps a starting point for international debaae, not at my level but levels above me. i think when they put that on the table, i think the secretary of defense, seblingts would take those, carefully consider those and say, now, what's the -- what's the counterproposals from the united states from china, from russia, from europe, middle east, how do we knot on the table? i think we do have to establish that in the lanes of the road. with respect to sovereignty, that's much more complicated. and the reason is look at our businesses as an example. they are multinatural in nature. and as a consequence, working with business and industry, industry and business working with government, we have opened up a set of investigators that don't easily droft 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. now, i think those are the kinds of thing that's need to be put on the table and talked to and start out as a call it version 1.0. >> in the second row, please. >> randy. >> thanks for at call. general, randy forge, ray young. congratulations on your promotion and thank you for your service fplgt in your remarks, you talked about one of your -- on your to-do list discouraging ma nerve lent or bad behavior. another word might be deterrence. i was wondering since deterrence was one of the issues specified under the comprehensive international cyber security initiative articulated in the previous administration and that issue has continued to receive some attention, i just wonder what are your thoughts for the potential of deterring the kinds of ma nerve lent behavior you talked about on the web.

>> i used discourage because i couldn't pronounce the other word. i had to break it down into two parts. i think deterrence, let's go back to the previous question. if nation states agree on what we're going do to deter malicious actors in cyberspace, that will go a long ways to do this. in this case it would be the joint cyber investigator, joint task force, the fbi's thing that would actually take within the domestic capability as you all know, they have a great capability but it's not good enough for what we need. and there were statistics last year that came out that said the amount of money being made in cyberspace eclipsed the drug trade. when you think about that, you can see good news the drug trade is down, i don't think that's true. i think it's just the opposite. as a consequence i think putting

it from the nation's perspective, what's on those networks that we got to secure? well, it's our intellectual property, the future of our country, the future of our industry. it will make up the future wealth of this nation. we've got to protect it. so i think establishing those rules of the road in cyberspace are going to be key. i think that's not a cyber com or defense department per se's conversation. we may play a part in it but i think that's going to be state, justice and the administration and we have a supporting role, a technical role. but i do think that laying out those rules and then going after those cyber actors who could come through any place in the world, bounce through any place in the world and attack anyone with virtual impunity are the ones that we have to police up first. and it's a huge issue.

>> good morning, general. again, congratulations on your fourth star. some of the adversaries have been working on itc 6 level architecture attacks. since the united states runs on itv 4, do you see issues converting to itv 6 or are we going to look at a next generation for cyber warfare or do you see that as something that's already under way by multiple agencies? >> i think there's a lot of folks looking at the transition from i.t.v. 4 to 6. it's something we have to do at some point. you hit all of the key points. it is kind of interesting when you ask that, i remember somebody weird trying to explain why we are not at 6 and why we are at 4, and they said why not have a middle run and go to

i.p.v. 5. 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 technically, we have to make those moves there. the number of addresses and things like that are key and we have to come up with some of that. 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 is that step going to be? i think that's still open for discussion. clearly, you have to take some of the benefits of 6 and the addressing and other things and look at it. i admit i have an ipad. when you start to think about the tremendous capabilities that we have out there and you think about all of these tools, eyephones and all of these things coming out, the computing on the edge is growing huge. we have to account for that. i think ttat will drive us down

that road. i just don't know where it's going to end up >> you had a lady over on the other side of the room. >> good morning, sir. cat nalis. i have a question that's been touched on a little bit. there's a vulnerability in cyber that think we kind of ignore that comes along with all of the social engineering posed by our allies, nonallies, other countries in the world. nation states with little or no division between academia, industry and government, students raised with the government 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 are government, whether they are industry. my concern is how is -- is cyber command, along with the other

agencies, along with industry in the united states actually going to address this? ish think as we look in the future, that is where our real threat lies, that is people brought up and trying to do what we are 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 will 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 dofede and the way we're going to do this and we all agree to it, that will go a long way towards getting there. the key will be how do we ensure that we all enforce it equally. that will be the pardon part. and i think we're going to start walking down that road. that is not a u.s. cyber com leader statesed earlier. i think that will be state, the administration and others. i think it's a international issue that has to be addressed and put on the table.

>> we have someone in the second row. >> whole row of them. >> shiven gordon with "the wall street journal." thank you for doing this, sir. i had a followup on the situational awareness question. i was wondering what your role is in developing better situational awareness inside the u.s. sort of nationally? and 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 sflob >> ok, well, a couple of parts. let me handle first my role with respect to the military's networks and how we get situation awareness there. in a war zone i said we have three cases. in a war zone, commander has to have confidence in his command and control system. increasing our our intelligence, our operations, our weapons platforms are all being brought together in cyberspace. we have to have confidence that

that space is secure and whoever's running that space for that commander in that area has to know that's secure. you can't afford to lose it. tremendous vulnerabilities. so my responsibility if that regard is help articulate the requirements in the wartime effort. if you think about the defense department networks globally, in the department defense networks. that's my role. if you look at the rest of the government, that's where phil and his folks are going to come in and say, how do i now help the other government departments and agencies see their networks so they can operate and defend those, just as the military will defend it? our responsibility is assist them if they have request for assistance, technical assistance, we will provide that assistance. i think from a national perspective, if we come up with a situation awareness tool, call it x we should have each other department pay to have x develop

it for them, too, perhaps we can all use it. microsoft office or something like that. now your third question, third part of that, civil liberties and privacy. i think the key in this is overnight. this is 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 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 protect thh law and civil privacy of our people. now, there are issues you get into that. you can take it from a domestic side. what's what does the fbi do when it gets a warrant and what do we do with a foreign intelligence surveillance act in court?

both of those now get into classified areas with oversight. so i think we do that very well. the hard part is we can't go out and tell everybody exactly what we did our we give up a capability. but maybe extremely useful in protecting our country and our allies. that's the real what i see the two things that we balance. so i do spend a lot of time with the court and with congress in explaining exactly what we're doing, where we have issues, where there needs to be change. what we can and cannot do. went put that up to the court and we get things back from the court. i think it is growing and getting better. we spend 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 defenddd your system, 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 the end of the day, they're through. that's the problem we face. so i think the real key to the issue, how do we build the confidence we're doing it right with the american people w. congress and everyone else? that's going to be the hard part. 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 can currently protect our civil liberties and privacy? i have four daughters and as i said 12 grandchildren. my daughters are huge users of this area in space and that they like their civil liberties and privacy, too. within we opportunity ensure they have that. that is one of the key foundation this nation was built

on and we take an oath to protect and we take that very seriously. >> i'm cognizant of the general's time and he's been very generous. maybe two more questions. how about if we get arnaud there, off to do an in-house question. >> i think we can go about ten more minutes. >> about 15 years ago, a great deal was written about the threat of cyber warfare, cyber terrorism, the marsh commission, a man owe graph was produced by csic. i wonder why it took 15 years to set up that command? >> next question. i think part of it had to do, they had to teach me to read along the way. so that takes some time. you know, it's a tough question to answer. i think it is a combination of things. one 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 does the 21st we said, no cyber command -- boom, we're here. if you go back to 2002 when you saw the department wreft ling with how are we going to do this? first we said which combatant command will have the responsibility? we went to space com, u.s. strat com. strat com said how am i going to do this? i need technical expertise. who has technical expertise, they picked dsia, because general -- were you there at the time? general ratigaee was there and gave him the general ops mission. they said who can help with the offense and looked at n.s.a. and the rest as i explained. but it takes time to evolve it.

so it's not something we jumped into, and 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 row, is that kate? hi, kate. >> hi, kate martin for the center for the 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 the problem of protecting national security information is very important in this field. but ask you whether -- nevertheless, in the last administration i think lots of members of congress as well as those of us in the civil liberties unit conclude thad in fact the intelligence capabilities were illegally

trained on u.s. citizens and so the question become dees spite those oversight mechanisms, how to prevent that from happening again and whether or not you plan to undertake an initiative to look at the possibilitt of greater public transparency given the succession of national secrecy in this field in order to help build the public confidence that you referred. >> that's an easy question. i'm going to turn it over to -- no. first, you made some statements i don't 100% agree with so i will put it back in my words if i could. illegal, versus constitution article one, article two, article three. i'm not a lawyer. i just admitted i just learned to read so not a lawyer. whether the rules 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 congstution? what we have is a constitutional issue that we have put down on the table. if you take 9/11, a tragic event for our country, the question is how do we ensure we don't have another terrorist attack and we don't give up our civil liberties and privacy. both are national objectives we want to achieve. when with you look at that and the one weers trying to achieve. so i think what i can do is jump forward. it's hard for me to jump backwards because came in the middle of the last debate and say here is my opinion, the way to do this in the future, transparency at the classified level between the congress, the court and administration of what we're doing so all three agree 100% this is the right way. think that's the first and the

most important step that we have and i think we're doing that. we spent a lot of time with the court, with congress and the administration, with the oversight committees to ensure they know what we're doing, why we're doing it and debate it there in a classified setting. and then with the court, go forward with the court and state what we're trying to do. i think the american people should be -- would be very pleased to know the way we're doing it. in fact smrks would say why does it take you so long? i think the answer is, these are tough issues. you know, we have a lot of lawyers at n.s.a. and in the nation -- all good people, i'm sure -- if we divided the room in half and put one half lawyers and one half another we can debate this issue until we all go to sleep. so the issue i think we have, the one that we really face, the one that you're driving at is where our country wants to be.

we want to protect the some say the constitution is not a suicide pack and agree but it's not something we are going to throw out civil liberties and prescribesy. we were built on that. that's how our country was built. we wasn't want to ensure we do our part to it. my responsibility as director of n.s.a. is to ensure what we do comports with law. and so every action we take we have legal reviews of it all the 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 for great reasons. bottom line, i think we're doing this right. doesn't mean we won't make a mistake. but from my perspective, i can tell you we spend an awful lot of time ensuring that we're doing it both to protect the country and other things we can on that side and to protect

civil lib advertise and privacy. i will tell you, i sleep good at night because of that. >> we started the series, at&t has helped us to underwrite it and helps us support it. we started the series in september 2009 with deputy secretary lynn, who is supposed to announce the creation of cyber command here. >> he did. >> and i'm really grateful that we finally some time later got the results. i think that was a tremendous speech. thank you very much for taking these questions, which are all difficult and good. and if you could join me in a round of applause. >> in a few moments on c-span,

arizona government jan brewer in her meeting today with president obama on immigration. about five minutes, the briefing on the gulf oil spill. following, that a look at the legal aspects of the oil spill from the attorney involved in the exxon valdez incident in 1989. later, a national governor's association report on the fiscal condition of the states. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, more on oil-drilling technology with bob tippee, editor of the oil and gas journal. sara murray will take your phone calls about long-term unemployment and we will be joined by susan carbon, director of the justice department's office on violence against women. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> i said -- oh, my god, this president's going to be impeached. this is about eight weeks after the break and woodward said we

can never use that word impeachment around this newsroom lest anybody think we have some kind of an agenda. but the awe of that moment stays with me. >> search for watergate with c-span's video library. watch woodward and bernstein from earlier this year and 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. zas governor jan brewer met with president obama at the white house today to talk about her state's new law on immigration. afterwards, she spoke with reporters for about five minutes. >> hello, everybody. we just completed our meeting this afternoon. it was a very cordial discussion of what's taking place in arizona and dealing with our

security of our borders and illegal immigration into the state of arizona and into america. . >> i do not know what their suggestions are going to be in terms of the national guard and the $5 billion he has indicated he is going to send down there. we will see how that is this -- how that is distributed. that has yet to be figured out. the also determined that we needed to be more closely

coordinated in our efforts and information so that we would be better able to correspond with one another. >> you support a decision on the border? >> that was not determined. i was not privy to any explanation. they assured me that within a couple of weeks, because i did ask specifically, that staff would be out to arizona to meet with my staff to fix the problem. i have a responsibility to the people of arizona to get more specific information. i will tell you i am encouraged there is going to be much better dialogue between the federal government and the state of arizona. i hope that is not wishful thinking.

we have three new c-span books for you, each with a unique contemporary perspective and perhaps something new to you about lincoln, the nation's highest court, and the lives of america's presidents. to order, go to c-span.org/bo

oks. each would be a great gift for father's day. >> a briefing about the gulf oil spill with admiral thad allen. he spoke with reporters for half an hour. >> for the first time in a couple of days, i have good news. we just cut the riser pipe off of the package. they had to use the sheer cutters, which are the ones they did to use the other pipes yesterday. the other saw we are attempting to use was not successful, so we replaced it with the shares which do not have as clean a cut, but we do have a cut now.

the next couple be to put the containment cap over what is left of the more riser pipe and start seeing if we can move gas and oil up the pipe to start syphoning off gas and start production later today. we will give you updates throughout the day. is significant step forward at this point. the challenge now is to seek that containment cap over it. it is different between what we were trying to do with the smooth cut and what is happening now. we are going to put a very solid steel with a cap that will produce the amount of oil that could potentially leak around the connection. this isn't a regular cut. it will be more challenging to get the seal around. will have a containment device there to capture more oil than we would otherwise. we will have to see how effective it is. we will have the option to use undersea dispersal to deal with any oil that will not be captured. it will be kind of a test and

adapt phase as we move ahead, but a significant step forward this morning. i am pleased to report that. a couple of updates on what i have been up to the last 24 hours and then i will answer questions. i spent time with the epa administrator. she has been in the area. we have gone in different directions to cover as much area as possible. she is from the local area. she has existing relationships with the community parishes. we have been working together. she has been closely following the disbursement issue. the epa has done a lot of water testing and air quality testing associated with it. so far, they have found no impact on wildlife related to toxicity, but there will continue to do that. we will work closely with epa on this. we are committed to using as little disbursement as possible on the surface and to

concentrate its subsea, where it is most effective, and to minimize the effect on the surface. we are approaching the 1 million gallon mark on that. we will continue to work with the closely as we move forward. we announced yesterday that we had approved the goals from the state of louisiana to add more segments on to the army corps of engineers. there were approved by the army corps of engineers as illegitimate means to deal with the oil spill to keep oil from getting in -- as a legitimate means to deal with the oil spill to keep oil from getting in to the marshes of louisiana. i spoke with governor jindal and will continue to work with them moving forward. as you know, the upper edge of the perimeter of the spill -- as i have said before, this is a collection of spills, not one monolithic spill. it is approaching mississippi, alabama, and florida, with some

reported on the islands. we have moved a large number of coast guard assets into the area. they have capability to do surveillance and also command and control. we have 250 coastguard skimmers with equipment on board the boats. we have patrol boats working to support the vessel of opportunity vessels we have enrolled to help us scout for oil passages off shore and conduct skimming operations. will continue to focus on the mississippi/alabama at issue. we continue to move boom into alabama. we are looking to deal with the entrance to mobile bay. with that, i would be glad to take your questions. you always go first, so go ahead.

>> talking about top hat, you obviously try capping before and it has not worked. how hard is it to put a containment cap over this pipe to stop the oil coming out, with the currents? >> prior to the cut, they extended the containment cap at the end of the riser cut. that is suspended right over the area. it is not even moving it in. it is moving it down and seeking it. it is an inverted funnel that is wider than the pipe is going to cover. there is a rubber seal around it. i do not want to make two simple analogy, but it is not unlike the rubber seal inside a garden hose. you get that seal to fit as good as it can, understanding it is an regular cut. there will be doing that in the next couple of hours. >> what is the latest on the

underwater crews and the dispersal of what is going on under water? how many skimmers are on the coastline? >> we have skimmer's all over. there are some in alabama, mississippi, louisiana. tony russ will give you the exact number when your done today. go back to the first question. i am sorry. we had extensive discussion in our briefing yesterday that no administrator -- she is meeting with research vessels and talkkng to them. we have had reports from research vessels from universities that have found what they believe to be plumes' under the water. we are in the process of taking samples and try to figure out what they are. they are denser than the water but we are not sure whether it is oil or not.

the use of the subsea dispersants could have that oil gather below surface. we are checking the oil as it goes up the water column after dispersants have been applied. dispersants' generally make the oil separate. it would gather in a plume undersea. we do not know if there is a causality between the dispersants and the plumage been reported. there are zero ships at different water depths taking samples try to understand what concentration is at what debt. will put together a data map and a model of what is going on out there. we have some progress out there. we just have not finished the work. >> bp is running ads and promising they are making this3 given that all they have done has failed, how much confidence do you have that we will get it right? >> their assertion and their duty to stand by it -- i have not seen the advertisements yet.

i am not sure. we need to separate a couple of things out. our applications of technology to cap this well or contain the flow -- using technologies that normally work in oil spill response orwell containment but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. we are doing things where there is no human access that are legitimate ways to respond to these problems. a lot of times they're going to be adaptations and evolution. that is what is courage to happen here. they have the duty. they are the responsible party. we have a duty to oversee them and we are doing that very aggressively. >> [inaudible]

>> based on what they know, they are going to be drilling through. they anticipate it will be harder to drill through rock and other sediments. we are getting a daily update on that. they are slightly ahead of schedule right now. we stopped -- it is mid august for the first well. regarding the deep driller 2 that was taken off station, one that was being deployed and we thought there was an opportunity to cap the well, when the one option was to put a blowout preventer over the one that is on there. they deployed one. they went out and started a relief well. when they started the top kill option, they thought they might be able to stop the well with mud, to put a plug in. there were going to put another emitter on top of it. they stopped drilling operations

for that time to deploy if that was needed. it was not. they went back and resume drilling. they are still on schedule to complete their portion of the drilling. >> someone believes from previous attempts from plugging the well -- >> i do not know if we know exactly why the diamond saw failed. the conjecture is that it encountered the drill pipe inside the riser pipe. anybody who has tried to saw a limb of a tree -- if you are not holding onto a you have pressure back against you. you are pushing it away. it is wobbling around. the pipe was not stationary enough to put pressure against it for the saw to be effective. they tried it for several hours and said it was not going to be successful and went to the second option. >> the containment efforts that were [inaudible]

was there seawater being [inaudible] with the fitting cap you have to put on the well -- >> i call it looser fitting but it is still fairly tight. there is a problem with oil interacting with seawater. at that temperature and pressure, the natural gas that is coming up interacts to form hydrates. that caused the first containment device to get buoyant and float away. as they built these new containment caps, and they have several on the seafloor, they're going to put ports in the top where they can put methanol in to deal with the hydrate problem. there will also put in hoses to inject methanol to deal with dehydrate problem. >> some people say the fema

people think there is a threat of lightning strikes. what does that tell you? >> we have to stop when we have enough lightning. the weather does not always allow us to operate in small boats safely. we have made floating hotels closer to the marshy area. we are always going to have to deal with weather. that is a huge factor in in- situ burning or mechanical skimming. sometimes the sea state will not allow it. we are in hurricann season. until the relief well is done and the well is capped, we are going to be at some risk of exposure to heavier whether, even not a hurricane, that could force us to stop certain operations. we are working with british petroleum on a series of alternatives that might make the operation more survivable in heavier weather, including bringing in larger platforms for

the production of the oil that is brought up to the containment devices that could stay on station in longer and heavier weather. we need to face the possibility that a certain storm condition would force us to stop the containment recovery operation and get those resources off for safety purposes. at that point we are going to have oil being discharged. they are looking at systems where they can mitigate that, although vessels are not on station. we have to manage day-to-day. there is no guarantee, moving forward. >> british petroleum said last week that it was reviewing 11 alternatives to correct this. has that been completed? [inaudible] what is the epa sanctioned to use? what is the result of the discussion between bp and the

government, and what will they allowed? [inaudible] >> the correction is allowed by the schedule and underuse by epa. we have had bp provide information to epa on alternatives to the dispersant. they're looking at the supply logistics if we were to move to another dispersant, if there was enough out there to be able to be used for what we need to do out there. this is not a closed issue. it is a very tough issue. this material is available to us now. it is effective. the thing we are most concerned about is the total amount of dispersants that have been deployed to date and the impact of subsea dispersants at that debt in the water column, which we do not have a lot of information about. right now, a legitimate alternative has not surfaced. the epa continues to talk to us about it, but that is where we are at right now.

let me take one more. >> once the pipe was sheared off, there might be an increase in flow of oil. have you seen those numbers? >> we will put information out later today. as i was walking in i got the word that the pipe was cut. we have video down there. i will try to give you video on that. the board from the geological survey was and estimates -- was an estimate that it was suppressing some of the flow. it could be up to 20% more. will have to get some empirical evidence now we have the pipe cut off. at our request, british petroleum has done a couple of things which i think demonstrate good faith. the first is the number of video feeds being made available. they are offering to technical briefs a day on the operations going on, not only subsea but

with the clean-up operations. we are ready for questions. >> the first question comes from baltimore. >> i am with reuters. i have two questions. first of all, on the terminology, admiral allen, you called this a top hat. it is not the same top hat bp was going to use in may, a smaller version of that copper daily. this is a smaller contingent cap that has a seal on it. second of all, but this ongoing operation and the lowering of the cap and the jagged part of the pipe, will you give us an update later today when and if that takes place? >> we will.

we will absolutely do that. it is a little confusing because the very first containment system they developed which was unsuccessful was followed by the development of about five others that vary in their capacity related to how wide they are, what kind of seals they have on them, and what manifolds are set up. they could kill the show clients that are on the lower marine riser package. they could chilkill the choke lines that are on the lower marine riser package. the sale allows it to go over a riser pipe. that pipe is not exactly vertical now. it is 10 degrees and gold over. the rubber seal will fit on that even though it is not going to be a perpendicular fit. they have a couple others stored on the sea floor so they have other options. given the cut they have right

now, this is the best containment cap to be used. it is not like the one that was used earlier. >> thank you. >> the next question comes from susan baker. >> i am with dow jones. the diamond-year cut did not work. -- the diamond shear cut did not work. will this make this bill worse in the short term? >> it will not. there are two issues. no matter what type of cut we would have made, there was a potential in the minds of our technical flow rate team that we could increase the number of hydrocarbons coming out about 20%. that was an estimate based on the idea that the tank was holding back some oil that could be released. that is one issue. the other issue is once any containment cap is on this is not a perfect seal. there is a chance some oil could escape. in a perfect world ww want an

absolute steal where you put to pipes together with flanges and built it. -- you put two pipes together with flanges and bolt it. there is a chance the oil going up the pipe will be more than they can tolerate at a time and it will spell out from under the seals. we will treat that with subsea dispersants. the amount of oil that will get through is something will have to determine as they get the best they can. next question. >> your line is open. >> i think that might be me. i am from ast. you mentioned subsea dispersants. i have been reading on the epa website that they have not been tested and we have no idea what

sort of effect they're going to have on the environment. dispersants, i believe, cause the oil to sink, yet we are denying -- or bp is denying they are under water. if somebody could address that. >> let me clarify first of all -- when we talk about subsea dispersants, we are talking about the same dispersants being used on the surface being used at 5,000 feet for the first time. we do not know what the effects are of using them on the oil coming up the water column and the effect of dispersants at that depth. it is the same dispersants we use on the surface. dispersants' do not cause the will to sink. because the oil to break into smaller pieces that biodegrade more quickly. -- they cause the oil to break into smaller pieces that biodegrade more quickly. we do not understand what the fate is of the oil as it approaches the surface. that is what the current water

testing is going to be able to tell us. next question. >> admiral allen, i would like to know if you have any comments on the situation as far as the conversation you had last night, thoughts on the severity of the crisis. >> i am not familiar with the -- i will get my press officer to get back to you. i am not familiar with the report you refer to. >> our next question comes from brad johnson. >> thank you for taking this question. my question is -- you said a while ago and you have kind of

rephrased as talking about your responsibility to oversee this, but the president has said that it is in bp's interest to misinform the government about things that could affect its bottom line. what specific steps have you taken to prevent bp from misinforming you, the incident commander? >> the word trust comes out a lot. when we have a frank and honest discussion about this. there are a lot of ways to define trust. when i have a discussion with anybody, including tony hayward, my expectation is they will do what i asked.

if they comply with my request and continue to do that and are responsive, i do not know how you characterize that. if it is trust or partnership, whenever it is, there is a need to move forward addressing problems for the american people. the request we made to british petroleum for live video feeds, for technical briefings, for hydrocarbon management plans, for dispersal plans -- every time i have asked the have been given to me. there are issues from time to time with logistical coordination with cleanup. attended the issues of how coordinate and how we work together out there and create a unity of effort. i do not know how to state it more clearly than the fact that when i deal frankly and openly with mr. hayward and make a request i get an action. last question. >> this comes from jessica resnick.

>> i am with "bloomberg news" and had a few questions. the oil that could push out from the rubber seals that you described earlier -- i am curious how much oil you think will be leaking out. i understand it is preliminary. what are the scientists seeing. we knew for example that cutting into the riser pipe could cause a 20% increase in flow. what kind of percentage increase do you see from this? what the sea not been trapped in this cap? >> the content cap is going to capture the oil being brought up to the well bore from the reservoir below. the pressure in the reservoir is around 9000 psi. the pressure readings taken just before the top kill operation

began last week indicated that the pressure at the blowout preventer was around 3500 psi. that is the pressure of the zero oil coming up to the well bore, counterbalanced by the water at 5,000 feet. of the%- there is pressure for the oil to rise up to the top. the natural gas flares off. will the pressure of the oil going up into a much smaller pipe -- the price we are looking at are smaller than the well bore themselves. if they fill up and more pressure is created there, will enough pressure forced the oil around the sides and back down out of the seal? the answer is i do not think we know until we know how the containment cap is seated and how well the rubber seals have done their job and have some video that tells us how much oil, if any, is coming out. there could be close to none. there could be some. we will not know until we see

how the sale fits with the more jagged cut out there than what we anticipated. will have to wait and see the video. we will talk frankly and openly about it when we know. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> there was 114 skimmers, by the way. >> more now about the legal aspects of the gulf oil spill. our guest on "washington journal" was brian o'neill, who represented fishermen affected by the exxon valdez in alaska in 1999. name of brian o'neal. he is someone who has spent 21 ars of his professional life as an attorney representing 32,000 alaskan fisherman and natives in their quest for damages and repneumonia ration

from the exxon valdez oil spill what lessons can we learn from that experience to apply to what's happening in the gulf today? >> well, the first thing you learn is that if you're going to extract and transport oil, there's going to be catastrophic spills, and that's because people are in charge of the extraction and transportation of oil. the second thing is where the oil goes, nobody knows. inhe case of the valdez, everybody thought the oil would go southeast, and it goes northwest. and it went a tremendous distance, a distance of about the length of theewest coast of the united states. sohere the oil goes, you don't know. what it does, you don't know. its impact on different kinds of beaches, its impact on marsh

lands and different creatures are all unknown. for example, in alaska. in alaska oil impacted fishing seasons for about three years, but five or six or seven years after the spill it became a narnte oil had decimated, forever, a herring in prince william's sound. so the impact of oil on creatures and ecosystem sincere a big unknown. its impact on businesses. onisherman businesses and hotel businesses is an unknown. you don't know how long the oil is going to last or what its impact is going to be on your business. in order to figure that out, you need to wait a number of because the impacts of anil spill are odd. and it also has odd impacts on communities. if a community is a

resource-based commuty, fishing is a good example, and there is a man-made disaster, like, bp or like exxon. people take it very hard, and they tend not to get over the disaster until they get their full measure of justice. so you see, in coastal commuents in alaska that were subject tohe spill, the ineased rates of alcoholism, depression. divorce, bankruptcy. tax problems. and even 21 years aft the spill today, if you were to go into a coffee shop or a bar in an outstate town in south central alaska, it's as if the spill happened yesterday. so the intacts are widespread. you c't tell what ty are going to be now. and you can't even tell where the oil is going to go now.

host: as we get srt here, we want to remind miami we have statistics from television in anchorage to remind us of the size and zope estimated 10.8 million gallons spilled covering 11,000 square piles, and an estimate of theumber of animals killed by that spill include 250,000 to half a million sea birds, 1,000 otters, 300 harbor seals, 250 balanced eaglls, billions of samen and herring eggs and 22 orca whales. let's move to the traject roy of the legal history, because it helped stet stag about what might proceed here and how what happens here might effect it. the spill was in 1989 in prince williams' sound and by 1981 -- 1991 they had settled claims. five years later, civil case

baker versus exxon an alaa jury awaed $5 billion to 3 the,000 fishermen. december, two a u.s. appeals court reduced those damages to $4 billion exxon appeals and the court raises it to $4. 5. damages cut to $2.5 billion and june of 2008 the united states squort got involved ruleing the civil damages would be limitted to $507 million. let's start wh that final figure of the supreme court ruling. what did that meanor the 32,000 defendants andhe plaintiffs in the case. how much did they get in the end? >> the total amount that the plaintiffs got was about $1.3 billion. that included $500 million worth of interest. because it took them 21 years to wage this war against the exxon corporation. and it was a long and costly war.

we spent over $200 million in time and $30 million in cash. over 2 is years and i think exxon probably spent north of $100 million litigateing the matter. the conclusions i come away with are if you litigate with a big oil company, they can spend enough money to make you bleed through the years. and the second conclusion is justice is a long ways away. we've lost upwards of 20% of our clients. they are dead. and many othersives are in dis aay, and this money would have helped to put them back in play. and the money would have provided them withense of justice. host: we can understand where exxon would have that had money to defend itself. where did you get the money to prosecute the case? >> the lawye takeover years

-- the lawyers, over the years, contributed with the hopes that in the end we would win. so for 21 years we were living on our credit cards. host: and would you do it again? guest: is disruptive to your life. it's disruptive to ur professional life. it's very narrowing to work on one tter for 21 years. but you're going to law sool place, and this was my one chance to make the world a better place. so my answer to your question is, yes. host: with the arrival of the atrney general on the scene this week, anticipating of course, bp's parts that there will be all sorts of damages sauth, perhaps even criminal ones, what are you observing to -- observing bp to do to position themsels for criminal charges? >> ion't think they are doing no such position themselves.

they make contributery statements and qualified statements. by qualified statements i mean you say, well, we'll pay all legitimate claims. think think you just say we'll knows it's legitate claims. i think bp is not in as much trouble as people think it is for a couple of reasons. the first is even though attorney general andhe state attorney generals areaying we're going to prosecute or take at the prosecution of bp and sue it for natural resources. we saw it in alaska and it took two years for exxon to come to a cheap and me to negotiateuated government. the government doesn't have the ability to fightt and i don't think the government does. and there's a stra t.j. i can

element to -- i'mot sure anyone would want to do anything to disrupt bp no matter what bp did. and the third thing i unless a business man actually steals money from people, there always been a reluctantens in the court system and by prosecuters to put a white businessman in a suit in jail. so the criminal stuff, i don't know wheee it's going to go. the civil stuff, that is fisherman around hotel owners and states suing bp for damage ncere in allikelihood going to be another 20-year nuclear war, and i think people ought to get used to that thought and hunker down. >> whenal all the dust settled how much money went into the mockets of an individual fisherman in the case of 21

years waiting. an eimate? >> if you owned your own boit and permit about $60,000 $65,000. if you were a deck hand on a boat, $10,000, $8,000. host: and do you have a reaction to that abard? -- to that award. to that award? gut: i was shocked when the supreme court took the punitive damage away in 2008. and so were my clients, and the amount of money my clients got was not enough to make them whole and not enough to give them think sense again that jits was done. host: well, folks, you have heard brian o'neal and heard the top line of his 21-year legal saga being involved, on bhaffs of many of tens of thousands of the exxon valdez spill, we would like to hear your questions or comments as itelate totts gulf of mexico

oil spill. very anxious to hear your questions or comments on lessons learned and if you'd like more detail about what happened in the exxon valdez legal prosecution. let's begin with a telephone call from texas. this i rick on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning to you. host: yes, sir, your questions or comments? caller: one comment is i grew in southeast, louisiana. for then you have what they call bum rushes which isn't really moss but ma they call kane. and there's actually no actual bottom. and that will never be clean.

there's no way -- that was one of the biggest places, bass, and everything grow. and i'm going to give you an ample of the oil companies. i grew up in an area of venezuela called the wagon wheel held up by texaco started in 1955, the year i was born. and that area has been destroyed. there are pits every where. where they lost things and they tried to sue them i'm guessing in the color to -- and you can go out there today and can't even catch theish because they have sor and you can't eat them because they actually taste like oil, so ifnybody thinks big oil is going to do anything about this, they are totally out of their mind. thank you. host: your reaction to the long-term effects of oil spills. guest: well, i agree with what

he said and he captured an awful lot of the truth. on all of these on the mississippi dealta. i've heard 25% to 50% of all the wetland in the united states are going to be devastating. it's going to have impact on things we have no idea relies on the mississippi delta. and you can't clean oil up there. once it gets in there. it kills what's there, and the world's the less for it. host: lakewood, california, danny, independent line. caller: thank god for c-span. i love c-span. now i was wondering what environmental laws can actually be enforced right now mple? and like in instances of in -- like in imminent domain, can the government just come in and

take over bp's operaon and profit and take full control just to get thing done? thank you. guest: the are two questions. the first is what environmental odds come into play? bp can be prosecuted under the re act passed in 1989 which prohibits putting things in th water. the clean watt err act passed in 1972 and the migratory bird treaty act. but again, i don't think those are going to have much impact on b.p. at all. because i think the government will settle them out cheaply. the state governments may have similar laws but i don't think the state goto thes have the resources to fight with bp. the second part of the question was can the government take over bp right now and essentially atmpt to stop the

continuing spewing of oil from the bottom of the snoge i don't think they can take over bp. ethink they can federalize the response to the spill completely if they want to and go in and try stop it themselves but the problem is the government doesn't know how to stop an i'll spill, and bp doesn'know h tstop an oil spill either, which is kind of interesting, because we made deal with bp and ewith made a deal with champion that you can come in and take the people's oil. that oil doesn't belong to bp. it's in the ground. the deal is you can come in and take the people's oil and make so much money that the wealth is incredible. but in the return, you provide it to us and in a safe manner and a manner in which if you hurt people, you pay them for their hurt. they didn't go it in a safe manner, and i

>> next telephone call is from irving kentucky. good morning, gary. you're on the air. caller: yes. thanks for having me on, and i've always been a big c-span fan. i would like to ask mr. o'neal the whole thing about the drilling, like, this far down, it seems to me the whole thing is, like, premeditated to a sense that they had no plan when all this -- when the oil arted to flow, to clean this mess. it started with the compensation and two, mr. o'neal, what's the military doing about this or are they doing anything at automatic?

-- at all? host: can you help the caller? guest: yes. i have a couple of observatio. first is the caller makes a very good point. an engineer how can figure out how to go down a mile under the ocn and extract oil. but that's a huge tech in a logicachallenge. but they figured out how to extract which ishe second part of the challenge, they never really addressed, because to do things a mile down into the water requires technology that apparently we don't have. you would think if they were going to do that, they would have wait ad couple more years until they were able to tpwhilled enough redunden as i into the built mechanisms so that we would bsafe. part of the reason is our fault. and that is the demand for oil so huge that commanies are willing to go out and take

chances with our safety in order to feed our appetite for oil. but the it's their fault, because they shouldn be doing it unless they know how to shut it off. so that's the first part of the caller's comment. the military is involved in far s the coast gard is involved. and i've always been of the view, and i'm especially of the vy now that the coast guard is too cozy with the industry. you see press conferences and you thinkbout what you've seen in the last couple of weeks is they are like brothers in arms together in this ting thing. the regulatory arm of the government, the m.m.f., the coast guard, those who were supposed to ensure our safety were asleep at the wheel. but they are always asleep at the wheel. end of comment. host: actually, without

necessarily a comme, in the financial times this morning there was among its many stories among aspects of the oil spill there was this one written, just wand to share it with the you had a yeps, oil major is now forced to tack al public rellings disaster and here's what it says. on tupes evening, the executive was having dinner in a new orleans restaurant with thad allen when they were interrupted by james carval. t legendary democrat and never having been introduced, mr. hayward and carval spent the next 20 minutes symptoms sometimes heatedly agreing to disagree about the nature of the operation to contain the disaster threatening to ruin the latter's native louisiana and two the two then agreed to meet again in the same restaurant this time next year,

it was terse but pol light to mr. carval and gave my skept criticism to what he was promising. goich i started off talking tenant uncertainties of oil spills. there is a certainty to an oil spill, though in that once the oil is spilled, you really can't clean it up. exxon spent $2 billion. in its cleanup activities and cleaned up anywhere between 8 and 12% of the oil it spilled which i find an astounding predure. but they had the advantage of rock beaches and the advantages of a relatively contained area in prie william sound, although the oil eventually escaped and goes all theay to the alaska peninsula. here the mess is bigger. it's more oil. it's the gulf of mexico, which is a huge body of water. and you don't have the luxury

of stone-covered beaches. sort of shell-covered beaches. it's going to be in swamps. it's going to be in all kinds of marsh lands andetlands and on sandy beaches and you can't pick it up with skimmers. effectively you c't boom it all off. the only real interesting proposal i've seen with with regards of save these wetlands is the state of louisiana to build these sand -- out out of prome. but history teaches us once the oil is spilled, you're not picking it up. host: remember canne line you're on for brian o'neal. caller: hello? hi. i read something the other day, jay pepper asked o'bama at some press conference that there was

some 17 countries that offered to help with the cleanup and o'bama only accepted mexico's help and norway -- other countries had started to help with backings, why would we not accept any help to start cleaning this up? ors it even possible to start vacuuming upome oil before it eps spreading any further? guest: well, a couple of comments. first of all, you can't just go out there and vacuum up the oil. some of it is under water. some of it is in a high-energy environmen and it covers such a huge area, that it's sort of like throwing a dart at the side of a football stadium. so that's the first problem. but you do need to try. and if i was in charge, i would accept all the help i could

get. but again, i find the prospect bheak. once -- bleak. once it's spilled, it's spilled. host: you thought there was too cozy a relatiohip between the oil companies and it's been read about military corruption. slain explain the law. do americans have any recourse against agencies enjoined with protecting them where there might be corption or mismanagement? >> the answer to the question is no. as a general proposition, the agencies are charged by law and their answerible to the president, and they are not in any legal sense, answerable to us. host: good morni. rocket -- given exxon valdes

was essentially not held accountible f anything, and bp's mess will be more of the same, and the magnitude of these environmental crimes, wouldn't history suggest an med overthrow of some of these corporations and let their accountability with government will be -- guest: think of observation on the commencht. and that is in the valdes case where the supreme court comes in at the end anddbasically bails out exxon, it causes ordinary folk, fishermenme, native alambingens, to lose their faith in the -- alaskans

to lose their faith in the justice system of america. so the tracks from the goodwill that our governmental institutions have, it takes away from their legitimacy when the court system comes in and bails out a big player. an exxon or a bp. and that is not healthy for america. host: what was the prevailing argument with the majority of baker versus exxon? guest: the prevailing argument was that the award was just too big. host: on what ground? guest: that it was just too big. host: what constant constitute it is grounds for that? guest: well it said in big oil spills the ratio is going to be one-to-one for compensatories against punitive, but that i go

nors 250 years of anglo sacksen injuries prunes. you know there's a court you find in the bible and english common law and they come to america. th are part of the law at the time of the revolution. and they have been with us in all otr aspects of the common law since the signing of the republic. it is the first time anyone's ever -- and the justification, if you'll read the opinion, the justification essentially is we think it's too big. and we're making it up as we go. host: let me tell you a littl bit more about brian o'neal, in dition to his long legal career, he served from 1969 to 1979 in th u.s. army obtaining the rank of captain and then served as the stapt to the general council tthe

department of the army. he's joiningtous talk about about his work of 21 years and representing plaintiff -- as the gulf gusher continues. next is lions, illinois. this is a call from al on our democrats' line. caller: thank you. it's a beautiful day. . >> what was the decision? how did that spin out? t: