there was no communication on the ground to get to him. they know i was a firefighter. i called the fairfax search and rescue team and we were able to get to their area. that raises a caveat. not only did we have this incredible success in haiti with the social media tools, but we have the unique opportunity to have a telecom network over which all of this was later. we do not always find that and have not ever before had a delegated network that was so widespread and available immediately. there were more satellite dishes that we knew where to put shortly thereafter. although we want to have these

tools to layer on top of our traditional response techniques, we need to be careful about becoming too reliant upon them. in many cases, the terrestrial and satellite networks will not be there immediately, if at all. we will not be able to have the same kind of response. we need to look at these at jokes -- adjuncts. >> great question. just kidding. that was a statement. >> i would like to talk about how you integrate the information you are getting from ushahidi into the actual response. people in the field were able to get information within a radius. can you address that? i want to ask if you are talking to the all persons' access networks.

>> i will have to let some other colleagues comment on that. i interrupted only briefly with that system. -- i interacted only briefly with that system. the fletcher team that ran the project was coordinating a comprehensive evaluation and impact assessment. the expert team is looking at what happened in the first few weeks to understand how it was connected to the response. we have on record the marine corps and the u.s. coast guard saying that they used the platform operationally to literally go and save lives. those are and a barracks that are useful -- those are anecdotes that useful to motivate volunteers. we need to understand the impact in more rigorous ways. the ushahidi has alerts feature

that allows the world. program in haiti -- that allows the world food program in haiti to say that they are managing and area. you can see that you want any information out of this particular area. you can specify a 10 mile radius. you can say you only want to get food distribution information or another key word. the idea is to let the end user define the information that they need so that they do not get bombarded with generic information. it is more demand-driven instead of supply-driven and spitting out information. the idea is to improve real time and real space situational awareness. people in the program and in the affected communities can get the information. that is the idea. think we have run out of

time. right? one more question. >> i have a question about multi-lingual cooperation. i have worked in haiti. i also worked in the balkans and some other places. to help with haiti. it is available now. i made it for people who may not be in both places on facebook and in haiti. i found an interesting problem. we had this crisis in a place where the language is not spoken that much outside the region. that is creole. i was working doing translation and bilingual treating tw --

tweeting in french and english. i think it is an important issue. i found it really important in the beginning of what was happening in haiti. witter, i am ungaro. >> about 80,000 text messages coming from haiti or translated within minutes by opening it up and getting people from all over the world involved. these were people who had fluency in french and haitian creole using their time to translate these text messages. it would not have been as useful

for the responders if the text messages had remained in creole. with the response part, that was all at hod hoc. it was volunteers from around world. we're learning from everything that has happened. we're having conversations with the professional community. when i was in haiti a few weeks ago, the red cross are has ushahidi and is piloting the platform for hurricane awareness. and like to think it is inevitable -- i would like to think it is inevitable having the volunteers and experts working together. >> you asked about the translation. we have done four even snow. it is not as language. is cultural stuff. it is knowing locations from a local perspective.

the amazing thing about social media is mobilizing the volunteer force to do cultural, and geographical, and language translations in an instant. we have volunteers from the limited amount of impact we had, we had tons of volunteers willing to translate after haiti and chile. even in the gulf region, people have helped us to translate locations. >> a bunch of people are asking what happens if twitter is not around or goes down in the next disaster. are there new technologies they are working on? >> i am looking at patrick. i am following that lead. >> it is the combination of social media. in our research, we realized it will not always be twitter. things change. we do not know where the critical mass will go next. it is aggregating all the

sources we can and all of the sources we can get public access to. places like facebook have a lot of great information. as an outside research, we cannot get into that information. perhaps facebook could get into the information and put it out in some way. hopefully, we will talk about that later. >> community radio is superb pivotal in haiti as well. many more haitians had access to that. it is great to talk about richard twit -- twitter, but it is about the old and new technology interconnected. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you, panelists.

on to the second panel of the day. without a great technology platforms we have any social me aside, none of this would be possible at all. i would like to welcome the second group of panelists who will be discussing how some of the biggest companies in social search and networking are addressing the new challenge. please welcome to the stage christopher penn from blue sky factory. we also have andrew from facebook and lauren vargas. [applause] >> good morning. there is coffee in the back. have some more. good morning. we have a lot to cover today. i have a ton of experts here.

i want to set the stage quickly. take your brain back to about 1970 or 1975. how many people were fans of superhero cartoons? what would you say about a super hero who has infinite telepathic knowledge, a super hero but could see across the world in an instant? what would you say about a super hero who could immediately put together an army of allies? that would be phenomenal. we would have a show dedicated to them. we will have a comic book dedicated just to them. it would be really exciting. the funny thing is, that is you and every single person that you work with today. our infinite knowledge we just call google. our ability to communicate to

and the numbers of people is twitter. that is facebook. our justice league of america is those communities. our ability to cure people in need is listened to with radio six. you and everyone working with you are the super heroes of today. we have heard some of them on stage today. people are already doing amazing things. we get lost in the weeds. we have these stories and gadgets. they of buttons and shiny things. we like that. we forget to step back and realize the power of what is possible. let's start going through a few things. i will start by introducing andrew.

we will go straight to andrew. there we go andrew from facebook is up. [applause] >> thank you very much. i work for a startup. you may have heard of it. i wanted to start before i go into the formal presentation. we had a little rain this morning. i went to facebook to see what people were saying in real time. i searched for storm nbc on posts from everyone. i searched for storms on d.c. on posts from everyone. we had heavy storms moving from baltimore towards d.c.

here is another one. we just had a storm blew through, it too bad the knuckleheads did not fix it. right, they are not in session. [laughter] the power of our platform. [no audio] i want to start by giving you a quick overview. how many of you are on facebook? i like to see that. very good. there are now more than 500 million people on facebook. it is larger than the population of the u.s., germany, and japan combined. people spend over 700 billion minutes a month on the spot. there are over 900 objects that people interact with every day. the average user is connected to 80 community pages, events, and users. we have more than 70 translations available. more than 70% of facebook users

are outside the united states. our mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected. that is at the heart of everything we do. we believe that by staying connected, we can all make a difference no matter where we are in the world. i am going to go straight into our first case study. that was the earthquake in haiti. a couple of us were kind of the earthquake was happening that people were turning to facebook to see if people were alive, see where their loved ones were, see how they could help. it was clear from the start that facebook would play a critical role in the disaster relief initiatives. we did not just know how we could organize that and provide

essential resource for people to go to. after the news of the earthquakes. , we received over 1500 status updates a minute relating to the quake. the reporters were conducting entire interviews with those on the ground in haiti through facebook because the traditional lines of communication were not up or reliable. organizations were able to communicate with the relief crews on the ground in haiti through facebook. all of this spoke to our mission. we worked around the clock to launch a page called global disaster relief on facebook. that is a screen shot. the efforts on facebook to respond to disasters around the globe. the response in the days and weeks after he was unbelievable. it underscored the critical role

of the internet in connecting the world in times of tragedy. this page now has over 500,000 fans. though there and like it today. -- go there and like it today. after the earthquakes and will still, the page will remain a place where billions of people can educate themselves and find out they -- how they can help. that is whenever and wherever disaster might strike. we also did some things off of the disaster relief page. we have worked with some amazing partners. we partnered with media outlets on the hope for haiti concert -- telethon.te

app oneamed up with an facebook to drive a fund- raising during and after the telecast. we still work with them regularly. we also worked to create multiple charity gifs for haiti relief. in one week of response, nonprofits have raised more than $400,000 in a week on facebook. there were some statistics that researcher for ordered us that said that 39% of facebook users in the u.s., u.k., and australia had donated to haiti relief through facebook. that was pretty gratifying. we also helped others respond. we worked with bill clinton's teamand president bush's and lincoln park to post

messages on disaster relief on the facebook page to let people know how to share and help. we'd worked with some of our platform developers fa dorthat o farmville and mafia wars to help donations to haiti. we decided we were going to set up -- actually, that is not valid. we worked with the red cross, unicef, the state department, and others. we incorporated the chile finder app. with the gulf coast oil spill, we had a campaign where we asked the users of facebook to share their stories about the oil spill and highlight the ways that people on facebook were helping to make a positive impact. we also partnered with cnn. eric was my counterpart for

this. we work with them on the larry king telethon to raise money. we were part of the social suite. celebrities were interacting with facebook users. it was a phenomenal thing. before and during the show, there were more than 1200 likes posted on the disaster relief page. the next morning, facebook users helped to raise more than $1.8 million during the telethon. when we celebrated our 500 million users, the red cross partnership with us for our facebook stories launch. we wanted to feature stories of people who used facebook and a number of ways. they helped us to find stories about coping with natural disasters. that has gone very well. we're looking forward to finding new ways of using our platform

for all sorts of things. i think that is the last slide. thanks. [applause] >> peter will talk about building communities before and after crisis. psyched abouty sig the super hero news. i am peter slutxky. i run public outreach in d.c. i am not an expert on search or data. when i have been doing for the past couple of years at various companies is a community building, using various tools

like ning, facebook, and twitter to build custom-printed communities that can be used before or during or after any kind of emergency response. i want to talk about my response -- experience in how you can use the platform in the response that you are trying to do with your organization's and agencies. i will breeze through some of this. i want to talk about organizing the organizers. i consider that to be a great asset to our platform. you never know when a disaster will strike. it can happen any time. the key is to be prepared. that is why you are all here. how can you use platforms like

ning to be prepared when disaster strikes? you can use social media to build a community of responders. you can do this by getting followers on twitter or facebook. you can get members into your community better focused on disaster response. the contest the response methods. -- you can test the response methods. you can get information from intelligent people. you can walk through scenarios and derive best practices before disasters strike. when things happen in communities or on an international scale, you are absolutely ready to deploy this army of trained people who are ready to help you in your response. tools like ning are helpful

because they foster public and private communications and collaboration. you can use facebook and tortwitter to proliferate information and build this hub where you can focus on a certain group of people focused on a certain set of actions. another important thing is that these communities can be scaled very easily. if you are a company, in the company response network. if you are a school, a town, or community, even have a network focused on that. it can be as large as the red cross chapter, ngos, countries, continents, worlds. it can be scaled. you can have as many dedicated people as you want to run them. a couple of examples that i want

to show you. this is a firefighternation.com is about 50,001st responders and professional rescuers from around the country. it is part social but geared toward professional development. it is a great example of how someone has taken the ning platform and is using it for all kinds of purposes. there are 1600 groups. there's tons of media sharing. that helps with professional development and all kinds of tactics. another example is our border. it is an initiative to help with the impending or current prices on the mexican-u.s. border, bringing stakeholders to the table, training people, is sharing best practices, collaborating so that whenever

they will do with immigration reform or sending troops to the border everyone is at the table and ready to rock and roll. the last example is called music for relief. it is a network of artists that have come together. it was before the heating network. it was to build a network around all kinds of disaster relief. you can see how they used the ning platform and then used twitter and facebook to proliferate disinformation. i will wrap it up there. i am sure we will discuss with the panel. i will mention the rest of my presentation there. if you have questions, i will be happy to field the questions. thank you. [applause]

>> >> we have lauren vargas from radian 6. jet is parkedle obj outside. in a crisis, you do not have time to learn a new tool or set of tools. it is essential that you have business processes in place and that you have trained for how to analyze the data before a crisis occurs. before you even start to think about what tool you will use to monitor what is going on across the social webb, you have to have some basic things in place. many of you have the social media guidelines and policies published and transparent for the world to see. do you have expectations on the policies about what you are going to do and how you act as

an organization if a crisis occurs? do you have a listening. do you have a listening grid internally about how you will react and respond during a crisis? do you have an escalation policy in place internally when a crisis occurs? these are simple things you can put into place right now. r listening grid is not just what happens in your organization. you need to start filtering out your keywords. if you have a crisis plan in place, and build monitoring profiles around those particular keywords and topics. start with that. start with what you know or are expecting. start by monitoring those things. start by filtering out your keep stakeholders. when you build your listening

grid, do not think about it just being york organization. reach out to the influencers and let them know that you will reach out to them if a crisis occurs. bring them into the fold. you need to practice for what may happen. the volume that will occur with a crisis can be overwhelming. if you have practiced and have training modules in place for what will happen if a crisis happens, how will you start to identify and engage internally? when will you bring the key stakeholders in to your response mechanism? first, you have to have the process. make sure that as part of your business function. make sure that you are listening grid and escalation coordinate's with the crisis plan. talk to your risk-management. it is similar to the risk communication plan that you would have in place.

make sure you have those same identifiers in the social web. when you get to the point that you can talk about tools, there are a couple of things to keep in mind when you are selecting those. you have to look at the coverage of the actual tools. is this particular tool bringing in relevant data? this is what the training modules are for. you can test this out before crisis occurs. the analytics and metrics capability, make sure that your tool will be able to help you dig down into what is being said and you can quantify that particular data. how can you filter through the data? test out the key words and with the training modules would be before the actual fact. collaboration and workload

capabilities. you have to make this an enterprise-wide investment. it cannot just be the communications department. you need to enlist organizations and people outside the organization, sister agencies, key stakeholders, bring them into the fold. how can you use this tool to pass notes internally so that the external communication is as seamless as possible? how can you collaborate in the most streamlined way possible? engagement. does this tool not just allow you to monitor, but can you engage with in the tool? can you use it to make sure you are pulling out real-time data to respond? make sure that it aligns with your listening grid. if you are the person tracking the information are monitoring what is coming through, can you easily send that particular post to the correct person within your agency or sister agency or stakeholder so that they can

respond? last but not least, make sure that your tool is scalable. you will be dealing with the huge amount of dollars volu -- volume in a crisis. make sure that your tools can alter the state and spread your insights. make sure it can spread the work flow across the enterprise and to people externally. >> thank you. we have a lot of questions. the first question that a lot of people have asked about on twitter and on the moderated panel as how to deal with interoperability. radian6 can only listen in places where it is allowed to listen. how can we make a valuable information accessible when we need it? >> that was the thinking we had when we created the disaster

relief page as a hub where people can come and engage and communicate together. facebook is a robust platform. federal agencies and nonprofits can get on there and take advantage of our app developers. we have hundreds of thousands of third-party developers who have an aging technologies to offer for organizing, raising money, you name it. >> how does the listening tool deal with the wall? are there ways around them? >> we can only see what is public. that is why you need to make sure you identify where your communities are. if it is a walled garden, you need people in place monitoring the data who can filter it through. it may not flow seamlessly

through one tool, but least you have the listening grid in place so you have the consistent response workflow. >> information is everywhere now. especially during a crisis, you can turn to any platform to find out what is going on. i learned about things today that i did not know existed. there are a couple of things. one is using a tool like ning or a page on facebook, having trusted leaders that to aggregate data and share it as a trusted source. this is the same way as in an offline emergency drill. in a classroom, he would turn to a teacher who has been trained. at a disaster site, he returned to -- you would turn to a colonel, someone trusted to can give you the news. at home, you have countless

resources. you can see up a tweet deck or feed to aggregate that data. it is all about the role you are playing in a disaster response. your role as a social media director for the red cross is much different from the role of citizen-advocate sitting in your apartment trying to get your church to donate t-shirts for kids who are displaced. it varies. >> we know that despite the best intentions, we do not always have the ability or resources to plan ahead when a crisis happens. what are some quick tips on building a network? >> we see this all the time on ning where things will pop up overnight. we wonder who is banging away.

setting up a community on ning is super easy. the question is what networks you will tap into that are your baseline audience. the importance of gathering e- mail list, having a twitter falling, having a facebook following so they can easily disseminate information. let people know you have built the hub and hopefully would be the resource you need during the crisis. >> how you act faxst even if you are not ready? >> sometimes the crisis will occur where it will indirectly affected. they may not be mentioning your organization or agency. you need to make sure you have listening and monitoring profiles in place for things

happening point of need. you are looking at the industry as a whole. you can identify what will come overnight.pke or you will be able to tap into those particular conversations and prepare for that before the crisis is at your doorstep. >> the only thing i would add is if it is a crisis or emergency that happens overnight, the traditional media like local tv and radio, letting those outlets know that you have a page or group on facebook or ning with your organizing elsewhere -- or that you are organizing calls for. the traditional media is still very valuable. that cannot be underestimated. >> who owns social data? who is responsible for it, particularly accuracy and

availability? does facebook only social data? >> depends on the platform. on facebook, if you own what you post. when it comes to our hub on the disaster relief page, we post actively when major issues arrise like the earthquake in haiti. we also depend on a network of trusted partners who are also administrators to bridge the gap in between. they are contributing information that they own. i think that is an interesting question. on the platform. >> it certainly depends on the platform. one reason why we have seen ning growth to 300,000 active networks and millions of users is that actually shared user

data with the network creator. if you create a network comedy of access to e-mail addresses, profound questions that you can determine beforehand. -- if you create a network, you have access to e-mail addresses and questions that you can use to determine beforehand the information you will need. i will use that e-mail list and profile data to properly respond. the person who owns it is the network creator and the administrators of the site. if you have everyone being an expert in the community, no one is really an expert and you do not know who to trust. that is really important. >> other questions? >> tim tinker with a question for the panel and possibly patrick. what do you see as being the compatibility of the organic

spontaneous nature of social media versus the highly structured nature of the government's incident command system? if you understand the question, you know this is a huge challenge. we would appreciate any insights. right now, there's a huge gulf between the two. >> the biggest issue with interoperability is more of a policy issue dent technology issue. we were talking earlier about availabilityng the to bring the information into the system. the policy and security issues trump them being able to plug a google pipe into the mainframe. there are not many technology issues. it is pretty standard stuff. you have your basic hubs and

notifications. it is very much a policy problem. >> from a policy standpoint, it is also about who the trusted people are giving information. if information is coming down from central command or fema or the red cross, that information spreads in a different way from me saying that the thunder is outside my apartment. if eric tweets, i trust it more because he has cnn after his handle. it is important in social media to clearly determine hierarchies to figure out who is real, who is not, and what information should be spread or not.

>> let's take one more question from the room. >> are there privacy concerns went public information is outsourced and archived? >> like medical data? >> i was going to come here and not talk about privacy. [laughter] i will say if you are an administrator of a page on facebook, you have insights. facebook insights debut high level, aggregated, anonymous composites of your fans. i do not know that i can really speak to that question. >> what about how when things are on the internet, google remembers it forever? >> do not put it on the

internet. >> this is chris thompson. i have a nonprofit. we do use social networking to gather information to verify urgent incidents. the question of ownership of data and privacy, we are using the information. if we locate a photograph of an event that has confirmed the hospital has collapsed, we are collecting those and putting them on another site. that may or may not violate the privacy of individual who posted it. the photographs are owned by the person who posted it. it would be helpful if folks are providing that information and allow us to do that, if they can perhaps post something there that says that we can use their content. right now, we're using the common-sense approach of if the disaster is bigger than the

individual. if an issue comes up later, we will address it in. we're trying to honor the privacy of individuals. it would be helpful if there was a policy of that nature during a catastrophic disaster. >> i think that flicker does that. >> you can specify the type of licensing you want on the content. we're just about out of time. i want to talk about three things to keep your eyes on. number one is mobile data. we know these devices are powerful. these are q.r. codes that you can create in a crisis if you need to triage people quickly. you can print this out. it says "allergic to penicillin" and to to call. all of that can fit on a business card. we're seeing increasingly hyper-

local data. facebook, ning, radian6 are doing a lot with this. this stuff is happening as far away as nepal with people watching this. there are tools to locate where stuff happens. it is incredibly powerful. the last is augmented reality. there is an app for your devices that will let you turn on your camera put what you are looking at on facebook. if someone tweets that they are stuck under a tree, you can walk around with your phone, find them, and rescue them. this is not ubiquitous yet. it is still coming.

it is still very much in process. keep an eye on these three things as technology trends in addition to the social networks of getting data to the people on the ground and doing work. i want to thank the panelists. andrew noyes from facebook. lauren vargas from radian6. and peter fr. >> coming up, an investigative journalist talks about covering the war and wikileaks. also, a correspondent to the tv and radio program of " democracy now." live coverage gets under way at

3 30:00:30 p.m. >> we will have live coverage from louisiana here on c-span in just a few moments. this weekend, columbia university provost claude steele stereotypes' on learning and testing. the time magazine contributor it says that our view of work is shaped by how we perceive for at the time of maturity. the former cia agent on how to deal with iran. also, our fault book preview. for a list of programs and books, visit booktv.org

>> we appreciate your convening this to help us understand the deepwater horizon explosion. this was a tragedy beginning with the 11 deaths of the people on the rig. the nation has closely followed the events of the last 100 plus days. it has riveted the public's attention. i wanted to frame the organizational context within we which we're working. we have a number of technical questions that have been asked. they will do their best to address those in the time that we have. let me talk briefly about the organization. i have been the head of bush and energy -- of ocean energy

management regulation and enforcement. much of that has had to do with the management of the deepwater horizon explosion. i have testified quarter times in front of congress within two and a half weeks. i took over responsibility for 1700 employees in a complex organization with multiple missions. i inherited a reorganization plan designed to create three separate entities. one will deal with realty collection. the tworemaining pieces will deal with the responsibilities. the other will deal with the safety and enforcement side. members of my agency have been in the midst of the response to deepwater horizon. they have been integral part of the unified command in new orleans and houston.

they have done a terrific job of helping us address this complicated problem. david dykes and john mccarroll have been at the center of the joint coastguard oand oem investigation. they have been engaged in a series of public hearings in which witnesses have been called to try to get to the bottom technical issues and what happened in the well bore and on board the deepwater horizon. i understand you do not want us to address the specifics of that investigation. we are happy to take some questions on that as well. briefly on some of the other things our agency has been doing, we are in the middle of

discussions about the current moratorium on the border each drilling imposed in response to the deepwater horizon pullout blo -- blowout. i just got back from connecting the third of all will be eight forums to help secretary salazar make informed decisions on whether there are ways to cut short the moratorium before the current november 30 expiration date. the three issues i have been focusing on in the hearings are drilling safety -- i am sure many of the issues we will touch on today will touch on that. the second thing is spill containment. there were tremendous difficulties in dealing with containing the spill. all of us saw the horrible videos of the oil spewing out of the well.

thankfully, those scenes are no longer being seen because the well has been tapped. the third issue is one of spill response. one of the greatest concerns is that if there had been another spill, and virtually all of our national resources capable of dealing with spill response work allocated to dealing with the deep water response. things have changed. some of those resources are no longer the point. things have certainly changed with respect to spill containment. we are in the course of the public forums that will last for the middle of september. we're gathering information we think will be relevant to the henretary's decision on w to end the moratorium. the agency has come under a substantial amount of criticism.

we have been dealing with the criticisms as they come. one of the things we have done is to create a new investigations and review unit that will do a number of things. it will serve as an internal affairs arm of our organization to deal with allegations of misconduct. second, it is designed to enable us to have an aggressive enforcement effort in our agency in a way we have not have fully before. >> remarks from michael bromwich speaking before a committee analyzing the technical aspects of the gulf of mexico oil spill earlier this week. we go live to louisiana for the latest from the gulf of mexico. admiral allen is updating reporters. >> when we are done, we will

take questions. paul will give an update on the meeting. >> i want to thank each of the parish presidents and the governor for taking time out of their schedules. we're focused on what is unique to each of the parishes throughout the largest oil spill in history. we had a meeting several weeks ago. this was to reiterate that we still have oil in the marshes that needs to be addressed. we look at the progress being made at the well site. we have a transition plan that takes this to the long term from response to restoration as a result of today's meeting, we will sit down with the parish presidents and branched directors. we will be at the table together as we build up a plan over five levels that will take this to a point in time where we can declare it is clean. we are not there yet.

the important thing is we are at the table of the local level where it matters. we're working with and through each of the parish officials. i have found that to be a very productive meeting. >> this is the second time we've sat down with the paris presidents and the governor. i appreciate their willingness to get together and talk and a frank, unvarnished manner to problems on the table and deal with them. we will continue to work with them. i appreciate the leadership that paul has exhibited. the current plan as we get to the conditions where we can look at taking regional approach rather than a national approach, the conditions will be met or we can transition to a larger recovery organization. after the secretary issues his report, many of my duties will be shifting to paul as regional incident commander. let me talk about subsea monitoring and then i will talk

about the well head itself. we will have a coordinated, integrated system of bush and monitoring of moving forward. it will take the extensive amount of work done to date on hydrocarbons sampling around the wellhead and other places in the gulf of mexico. we will also bring in the epa who have been doing water and air testing. this is a significant amount of detection operations going on in and around louisiana to detect oil under the surface. we have a chart to show how we have been putting stair boom down to see if any oil is attached to it. we will put together a plan for the next 60 days that will integrate all of the monitoring being done that includes reaching out to state, local

academic institutions regarding their research capabilities. we will integrate this into a comprehensive system that will help us detect any submerged oil remains to be dealt with. it will direct our efforts as we're close to having the well secured. as we look at the marshes and beaches, we will do our best to locate the oil and move forward. this will lay the groundwork for national damage assessments. this will involve testing for the presence of hydrocarbons in the gulf and the long-term impact on the natural resources. this will hopefully blend into the follow-up long-range plan to develop a database to support natural resource damage assessment. we're moving forward in regards to that. there will be more information coming out later. i will sign a directive later today that will start the process moving inside the federal government. finally, we have finished and

ambient pressure test on the well head. the pressure has not changed appreciably. the one thing we can rule out is that it has direct communication with the reservoir. if the pressure had risen, with no hydrocarbons region we would know that hydrocarbons were being forced up. the question is what to do about not moving forward. the science team from the federal government has been meeting with bp engineers all morning. i am in personal discussions with secretary salazar, secretary chu, and the ceo of bp. it remains a work in progress. we are assessing the options we have. everyone is in agreement we need to proceed with the relief well. the question is how to do that to mitigate risks and the implications of increased pressure at the top of the well

into the legacy bop from the deepwater horizon. if you will remember, we installed the schooling -- spooling tool. we put that piece and then connected the stacking cap to that. that is the weak link in the chain. we need to understand the implications of pumping mud and cement in from the bottom and the implications for potential damage to that one particular weak link between the blowout preventer and the capping stack. everyone is committed to killing this well. we want to do it right. we do not want to introduce more risk moving toward. those discussions will continue today.

when we reach a decision, we will make an announcement. i am sorry i do not have anymore information. it truly remains a work in progress. with that, we would be happy to take questions. >> the hydrocarbons are being forced up? >> at the top of the annulus is where the casing and hangs at the top of the well. the hangar seated on a seal. if there is enough pressure, the hangar is forced up. the pressure is evacuator around that. the oil is now below the steeea. the seal is on top. the cement is on the bottom. we have stagnant oil. on the top we have the seal. we're trying to figure out if you start pumping mud and cement in if you will increase the pressure on the annulus where

the hangar would open up the seal in would you increase the pressure in the blowout preventer and the capping stack we're trying to better out what that might mean and how to mitigate that risk. we always knew that -- what that might mean. when we did the well integrity test we -- past, we always knew that there was pressure that we did not exceed the during those operations. it is the same limits we a been operating under all along. >> as you continue to find a solution, could that continue more work from the top? is there any idea of what that will mean? >> we are not ruling anything at this point -- ruling out anything at this point. we want to understand how to

bleed off pressure from the top. we could even put another blowout preventer on. we have sealed the well at this point. that would take a longer period of time. we're walking through the risks. " it is the same set of circumstances. there is no oil flowing into the gulf of mexico. we have shut in this well. we have had stability since the 15th of july. we have something now have not had before. i was not call it a luxury -- i would not call it a luxury, but we now have time to allow us to do the right thing in relation to killing of this well. we also need to be concerned about preserving evidence for the investigation. >> it is it, in effect, dead at this point? >> that is a good question. there are no hydrocarbons entering the gulf of mexico.

there is some leakage around the flanges. we have oil in the annulus. they estimate about 5000 -- 1,000 barrels of oil. there was no communication between the rubber market -- the reservoir and the service -- srufcae. -- surface. we do not want to upset what we've already done, including the cementing job. we did those tests, as far as the communication of the fluid is going down, the volume, the pressure. that said, what we have now is a segment that has gone into the reservoir and come back up the annulus. inre trying to do no harm this process.

questions from the phone? >> if you would like to ask a question, press * and then 1. >> i want to clarify some points you may. you said that everybody agrees we need to go forward with the relief well, but how to do that is in question. what do you mean by "go forward ?" pump mud and cement? just complete it without pumping mud and cement? at what point are you satisfied the well is dead? >> i have talked to the seniors in bp leadership several times, including bob doubly.

-- bob dudley. nobody would be more delighted to show that they can drill down 79,000 feet and hit a seven-inch pipe. there is no disagreement on that. the question is how to evaluate the conditions we have encountered, assess the risks, develop courses of actions moving forward. and the national incident commander, and i will issue the orders based on my determinations to kill the well. i will add that once the well is dead, there is no longer the threat of this charge, there will be no rule for the national incident commander. it will then shift to being a statutory and -- statutory issue for the department of the

interior. >> the next question comes from palm springs with the associated press. >> i know there has not been an order issued. pending an order with the 96--- an order, would the 96-hour time frame still apply? >> that applies to a statement i made earlier. it would take about 96 hours for us to proceed with the next ring run to make sure we knew where the drill bit was and then to intersect it. that would be 96 hours. >> your next question comes from bloomberg news. >> admiral, were you able to make any sense, or does bp have an idea, based on the results of the test and the amount of cement that they put down the well how thick -- how much in

depth of the cement is in the annulus? is it pretty solid? >> that is the big unknown. we did not have our real deviation in pressure, which indicates we have a static analysts with no communication with the reservoir. how thick the barrier is, i just do not think we know. that is the reason we have to take into account that it could be thick and not be a problem. or it could be very thin. if we put pressure in there, we could have a problem. that is the essence of the discussions on going. >> your next question comes from isabel. >> i would like to know if, given these results and these

decisions that everybody agrees that they should continue with bottom kill, if the time frame -has changed. you say it may be done between sunday and tuesday. is that still the case? could we have a new timeframe? >> once we have given the order to proceed with the relief well and the bottom until, it will be about 96 hours. if we decide there is some kind of preventive measure, it could affect the timeline, but no decision has been taken yet. if we were to look at putting some kind of pressure relief device or a new blow up printer, that would significantly -- blowout preventer, that would significantly change the timeline. >> next question. >> i wanted to get back to the

issue of the investigation. now that you are talking about replacing the blowout preventer, i am curious as to when the original one might get salvaged from the bottom. could you speak to how the operation will proceed? >> and the assumption that we have killed the well, there is no threat of discharge, primacy, statutory oversight, and regulatory oversight will shift to the bureau of ocean energy management and the government of the interior who will proceed with their plug and abandonment process under their plans. the law prevented is subject to subpoena of the joint investigation -- the blowout preventer is subject to the subpoena of the joint

investigation. there are equities related to the department of justice, relating to chain of custody. the plug and abandonment process will be managed -- will be managed within the department of the interior. we will ensure the preservation of evidence. it will most likely involve removing the blog printer, a story that on the bottom floor for some time -- involve removing the blowout preventer, and storing that on the bottom floor from some time -- for some time. it will then move up the chain of custody. two more questions. >> hi, admiral. i just want to make sure i am clear. are you now committed to

completing the relief well? >> yes. >> thank you. >> next question. >> thank you for taking that question. i am assuming that you do not know the condition of the cement inside and willis, -- annulus, so the well cannot be left as it is, making the relief will be required. >> i refer to the previous question. the relief wells will be finished. how it gets finished will be determined based on the further determinations. the relief well will be finished. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. >> this concludes the conference call. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> today, an investigative

journalist talks about the with the leaks, the iraq war -- wikileaks and the iraq war. live coverage is at 3:30 eastern on c-span. >> mr. president, just before christmas on 1978, i was appointed to succeed alaskas first senator -- senior senator. next month will mark the 40th year i have had the honor and privilege to serve in this great chamber. >> with almost 900 appearances over 24 years, look at the life and legacy of former alaska center ted stevens online at the c-span video library. it is all free and on your computer any time. it is washington, your way. >> here you are, senator.

daniel webster is -- >> harry truman, in 1939, he did this movie. he despised it. at the time, harry truman was seen as the senator from the prendergast machine in kansas city. i always wondered if he didn't think the movie was looking at him and his relationship with the political machine back home. >> donald ritchie, senate historian, "q&a." this weekend on "booktv, " claude steele at 9:00 p.m. eastern. on "after words," they say that we are shaped in our youth. then a discussion of irna. --

iran. for a list of authors and books, visit booktv.org. >> now, participants from the fire department and the bush white house talk about their experience during natural disasters. this portion is just under one hour, 15 minutes. >> ok, everybody. are we going to get started again? first of all, i want to take a moment to thank our sponsors for today.

she helped me with my public speaking abilities. next, genweb, which is graciously providing the streaming for today's events. i'm guessing you guys have it all figured out now. we're going to talk about it. i think we will start by introducing -- he needs no introduction for almost everyone in this room, i am sure. he will be our moderator today. if you do not know, if you live under a rock, he is of lager -- a blogger and techno-evangelist. he is now that -- at rackspace. he previously worked as a video

blogger. he is also co-author of "naked conversations." also on the panel, we have rights and humphrey -- bryan humphrey, public information officer from the los angeles fired a part in. so excited to have him here. [applause] my colleague at the american red cross, social media team, gloria wong. [applause] jocelyn harman, director of non- profit services. and mr. david almacy, senior vice president of edelman. >> it is an interesting time to hold this panel. we heard breaking news this morning from a company in london

who does made a deal with twitter. it is letting people like you talk to the real time engines of titter, to -- twitter. show me all of the items with the word "obama." only shows the items that came from people that got more than 5000 followers. that would get rid of all lot of spam. or, only show me tweets from this region or this area. i do not know if you have ever seen a real-time system like tweetdeck. they have real-time twitter clients. they don't have to calla nd -- data.nd gather

i am watching several thousand streams of data. you can see these moves lower. -- moved slower. i do not touch my computer. it just streams data. i am also using something called flipboard. how many of you people have and i pad -- an ipad? come on. that is really amazing. this is the reason to get an ipad. it takes your twitter and facebook feeds and turns it into a real-time feed. it is better than that. i showed this to katherine kennedy. she saw -- thought that water was for telling people what they had for lunch. -- that twitter was for telling people what you had for lunch. i said, let's put this in flip

board. she said, that is mind blowing. you can just pass through here like a magazine. this is my facebook news feed. it looks like a magazine. it is very beautiful. i talked to another company. they are building a database of location-based services for fire departments. because of your cell phone, an android, iphone, some other phones -- you have your i found -- iphone and it knows where you are. why do you need to tell it to look for the specific garment? it finds you the correct fired apartment or pizza place. it is even better, because it looks at the hours of the pizza place.

the data set will be different at 11:00 p.m. than at noon. there is one last thing. i met with the company a couple of days ago. they have built a database that fits on your iphone or york android phone. this database is powerful. it can store pictures and all sorts of stuff. if we all had that, if we entered something in here, like i saw a building burning, it would show up on your iphone within seconds, because it replicates the database peer-to- peer. it is a valuable system for mobile phones. that leads into the panel. there is a hell of a lot of stuff happening. google just announced new technology for their android phone. this world moves at such a pace.

you been talking about aggregating feedback -- you have been talking about abrogating feedback and we want to hear what you are discovering. >> for those joining us on line, it was said that we broke out into different tables. we are abrogating -- aggregating a lot of information and it will be accessible on wok -- wiki. should there be a common or central system that the public goes to for assistance, and how do you get them to do that? it is a two-part question. we got stuck on system and assistance. what is a crisis? as a tuition was agreed with the radically that we need to have -- the situation was agreed to that we need to have something

central and stable. many people said not just more, but more integrated systems. but some issues came up with parity. how do you roll this out and make sure we have socio-economic and geographic parity with the systems. it is been agreed upon that we have ada and other issues to deal with. until a few years ago, some parts of our nation were without 911. communicating with the trained dispatcher is the best way to go. as the fire department, we agree wholeheartedly with what the red cross executives have stated today. in a crisis situation, katrina -- i was talking to people in katrina who stayed there and were not able to communicate with -- they were only able to communicate with text. the same thing happened during

9/11. >> i was in the earthquake in 1989. we had voice out, but not in. t4ex -- text/sms is very important, is it not? >> it is a basic function. we realize that the system cannot be based on a smart phone. we looked at the free-form data. we looked at the possibilities of applications. we talked about the usgs, "did ou feel it," when there's an earthquake. we talked about bringing resources into regions that are severely impacted. >> you worked at a fire department in los angeles. what would you do if there was no data, no voice?

would you talk to ham radio operators? >> there are systems that are often looked over. we have had radios, we have helicopters. we would reach out any way we could. we would listen. when a hurricane struck florida, they were without systems. they went to a car dealership and lifted a balloon over the red cross info. this should not be proprietary. it has to work much like e-mail. it needs to grow like e-mail. we are very careful not to mention name brands in our discussions. in some cases, we have to escalate the definition of stakeholder. the information is not just for the locality or region, but

around the world. we make sure the information moves to them in ways that they can act upon it. some people ask how to get the system rolling. that was the suggestion that we start on non-emergency systems. every single person agreed that the best tools are the tools that we use every day. having to pull out a new application to call for emergency help when your adrenalin is flowing is not the best. if we can scale, that would be most advantageous. >> does anyone have anything to amplify or counteract those points? no? all right. >> that much said, the second question was, showed or how do you integrate existing systems with new systems? there were issues regarding the legality, including ada,

cultural, and language. you can call 911 up to -- in up to 140 languages. how do we deal with that in the digital era? is taxed communication best done free-for-all or with some formatting -- text communication best done freeform or with some formatting? when the dispatcher here's a barking dog, they will say, you need to lock that dog up. the simple act of locking the dog into the bedroom can get the paramedics into the house. there are certain things we understand about getting things under way. how do we move from the proprietary view of social data to a more open source solution?

the tools we are using now could easily be scaled to move away from their proprietary -- very proprietary to an interactive, open source compliance. this wiki is going to be a remarkable group of the answers from some very bright people. i have an eight-foot table and a five-foot table cloth here. many people want to get the feedback to find out, in a real time, not just real-time information-gathering, but an understanding of return on investment. are we doing the right thing at the right time? been a very cool. how about -- >> very cool. how about your table? >> we were jumping around this sheet.

i found there was actually a very clear consensus across all three tables. there was a focus on community. there was a focus on the last question. how do you help responders overcome hesitancy or a version? how do you get a higher rate of adoption of social media and the use of social data at these agencies? that escalated into a philosophical discussion about how to really push the envelope and deal with policy and everything like that. i will go back to the first two questions. how do you manage the public expectations that someone will respond to a call for help over the internet? how do you make sure that people of all socio-economic statuses them participate and get help? these questions boiled down to the idea that the agencies being responsible for talking and

understanding the communities that they are serving. it is not just what they're going to do. it is about what they're willing to do before the disaster strikes. that involves getting to know the community at all different levels and how they communicate. what community leaders are there? how do they work together with the community to help them -- help them survive and take care of themselves during a disaster? when that relationship is set up and a disaster strikes, it is much easier to do your job. that is really what it boiled down to for us as far as questions 10 and 11. >> do you have anything else? the next set.

>> kudos to whoever invited you all here. we had some smart cookies at our table as well. we looked at some obstacles at the federal, state, and local levels. i do not work for the federal government and i never have. they're the same obstacles that we see with non-profit and corporate adoption of social media. fear of making mistakes and being out of control, lack of expertise. there was a really interesting from rescission around cultural norms. many people who work here are ex-military and they have come up through a very hierarchical system. this is directly opposed to their whole east coast -- ethos. having to address those cool true issues -- cultural issues.

you spoke of a lack of training. a standardized training across agencies. fear of open source technologies, but also fear of proprietary technologies. whatever state are bought by china or something like that -- what if they are bought by something like that? >> i worry more about -- on 9/11, almost all of the lonstuff went down. i am not sure they would survive the traffic storm. everybody is trying to get information about their family member or something like that. then the systems could go down. the centralized ones could stay will staye of them up. you could find some data. >> obviously, it is hard to

answer the question, how do we overcome these obstacles? we need to focus on creating policies, training, and education. we also work on culture change and getting people more comfortable. i do not know how you do that. that is beyond my pay grade. they need to use these more open technologies and flatten the organization. the second question we talked about was authentication of data. i would call this, who do you trust? we should not assume that people are going to be sending us incorrect data. people who are closest to disasters are probably the least likely to be able to communicate. they do not have an incentive to try the -- tried to pull over other people's eyes.

we should always have a level of trust about the information coming in. >> that is funny. i have the opposite point of view. >> don't start off thinking that people are lying. i thought that was good. >> i was the first person telling them about the chinese earthquake. i saw people in cities thousands of miles apart say they felt an earthquake. i knew something was up, but i did not know if it was a hoax. we just had another hoax incident this week where somebody quit a job and held up some placards. techcrunch reported on it. i watched the usgs website. they became the root of the discussion about what was going on. we beat sea and by 45 minutes -- cnn by 45 minutes. they did not even see it.

now they are faster because they have teams watching twitter 24 hours a day. >> looking at the intermission to see that it was coming from multiple sources. -- information to see it is coming from multiple sources. have captains in the community. take pictures, do geolocation, provide a context to the information. train people on how to filter information. as a dozen journalists, we have to get better at verifying -- as a citizen journalists, we have to get better at verifying. we talked about, how can we connect helpers with helpees? people wanted a centralized repository for goods, services, and volunteers and, so the

people know where to get and give help. that made sense to me. we talked about managing the expectations about how quickly they are going to be able to receive aid. a few folks said, the public expectation -- they expect an instant responder. that is unrealistic. educating the public, whatever that means. >> did anybody talk about the databases? if there are five helicopters in los angeles that are available, i know they are busy. i'm not going to get one of those helicopters for x hours. if i have a database that shows me where i am in line to -- >> one of the most beautiful things about the traditional system is the busy signal.

as aggravating as it is, it tells you there is no agent to take your call, so you become self-reliant and look for others to help you. social media does not have a busy signal. we're incumbent, as responders give that feedback. i think you're right. it is an issue of advance notice. right now in los angeles, a car fire will get 200 calls. people will continue to call even after the fire department has shown up. in mumbai, we saw the re- tweeting. we have to be able to authenticate and identify these issues, and filter them. we're using open source stuff with great success. we have to help people communicate.

"om, "omg," -- those pop pu on my -- up on my radio screen. that is how i knew about the incident in toronto before they did. we have to understand where the triggers are. as we move forward, many people thought of this in relation to haiti. we can help prevent emergencies from becoming disasters. while we all have lofty goals to respond to a catastrophic event, the greatest opportunities are helping your local communities, police departments, fire departments, deal with something as simple as a water main break. moving a message or photo can do more to save a life and do more good.

as we look to do these things, it has to scale. the opportunities exist every day in your communities. >> we really wanted the government and the agencies to partner with what we call the the original social networks -- churches, mosques, synagogues. >> again, that is what we discussed -- get to know the community. people will have unrealistic expectations when they do not know you and that you are out there and when they have not been following you, when they do not listen to what you are working on. they have no familiarity with you. the longer that you know these communities and their leaders, know how the people communicate -- >> did anybody talk about the

effect of social media on over- deploying of resources to one area? in that earthquake, the media covered the bay bridge being down and a marina on fire. the santa cruz mountains had more people hurt and trapped, but we did not hear about that for several days. the world's attention was so focused. that was before the web, im, email. we were hyper-focused. >> i think you have a point. we focus on how quickly we get the information. we also need to focus on the quality. just because any event is known does not mean we have perspective. in los angeles, a monitor 24/7. monitored 24/7. i want to know how to bridge the gap and reached out to be a social media -- reach out via

social media. we believe every citizen is a contributor. even if you see the fire trucks, it is vital to continue to input the social media -- your own unique perspective. in the griffith park brush fire, it helped save lives and save animals. a can and does happen. >> this is the perfect segue. how should emergency social data be collected and by whom? one public that we brought up is that the information is coming in, but it is the priority of the information that is coming in. if i am pleading -- tweeting about the fact that my basement is flooding, hopefully you will not dispatch hundreds of crews to help my house.

although it would be appreciated. opposed -- as opposed to a house -- to a whole town that is under water. the information needs to be prioritized. i was the internet director for the white house of the last administration. i was there during katrina. we received six e-mails per second for about 12 hours. every 10th e-mail was a warning that our servers were nearing overload. they never did go down. i would try to plow through and find e-mails in terms of places we could provide assistance. i found one from a woman that claimed that her father was trapped in the attic of her house as the waters were rising. i was not sure if it was real or not. he could not make a phone call. his family member somehow knew that. i forwarded that e-mail on to

dhs and fema. i had forgotten about it. i got the e-mail chain. i loved it all of the e-mail exchanges. the bottom line is they got it to the right people and he was rescued. he had provided the address and phone number. there was just as good a chance that could have been inaccurate. we talk about using social networks -- part of a ring with facebook and twitter -- partnering with facebook and twitter. in terms of how it should be an aggregated, it is not really about who owns it, but who accesses it. >> part of a problem -- i was next to mark zucker bergberg's

secretary at davos. she was seeing hundreds of thousands of responses. the system is facebook. that is where most people are today. what is the right question to ask to help first responders get accurate data out of this body of people? >> you talk about matching resources to need. my wife and i were planning a vacation. there was a website to tell you about wait times for rides. if we can do that for disney world and the dumbo ride, we can certainly figure it out in real time. >> it is not always accurate. there is no sensor. >> that is good to know. i will report back. who is the first responder to

emergency social data? who acts? in a way, we are all first responders. if you're walking down the street and you see someone who has fallen in hit their head, you might be the first responder. you might not be qualified to provide assistance, but you should know where to go to do that. we talked about the concept of a common tag that people can use so it does rise to the core. so that if people are using this, it shows up on the radar screen for those monitoring it. the obvious answer would be the local emergency personnel, fire departments, third-party groups. you mentioned taking the data, applying that into knowledge, with a result of action. who isn't that actually response? -- is it that actually responds?

we're in an e-mail-based culture. in terms of doing what -- getting this information, it is a matter of breaking down some of those silos. the concept of good samaritan laws came up. the internet is flat. people might have the best of intentions, but that should be looked at. if someone does try to help them, you should not be able to turn around and sue them because you tweeted out something that potentially negatively affected them. >> you saved my life, by the way. i should put that card in my wallet. >> in the third question, the non-response agencies, how do you utilize data? there were many different

answers. i found that a lot of groups are already doing this. there is a lot of data being aggregated. in many ways, it seems to put business -- duplicitous. we talked about the office of coordinated affairs, the coordinated assistance network, global hands. what are the needs, the resources, and how do we matched them up -- match them up? what do we do with the data that is not needed? there is a responsibility to protect personal data. the analogy was used that, if you are a fisherman and you cast the net to bring into the, you throw out the tuna, but keep the mackerel. who owns the data? >> i thought your point of

putting a balloon in the sky and letting people know where the central point of demand is was really interesting. when i worked at microsoft, we had a conference and there were fires all around a conference center which shut down the airport. immediately, a war room not formed and people were sharing information. somebody called the airport, somebody called bill gates' pilot. i was sharing that with people in airports all around the world. they loved knowing. >> i offered that as an analogy. there is a way to put up a digital boulogne. unfortunately, we focus so much on response. you have heard the message "mind the gap." there is the public between response and recovery. it is a small gap.

what happens next? we need to smooth that gap. the best message we can give -- if i hear about flooding in your basement, i know that i need to start messaging about flood safety, electrocutions hazards, boil-water advisories. although i am not directly helping you, if we are doing our job right -- some people focused man hours looking at places where airports could be built. a piece of land is not enough. we were answering questions that did not need to be answered. if we focused on the matrix of the 15th emergency support functions and preparedness, that would have been a key element. if we take it one bit at a time, it is really easy.

if you understand the 15 -- go to the web site and see the national response framework. you must know and understand the national response framework. it is not just for government and ngos. you will find a spot where your skill and ability will let you help the greater good. we built allowed at -- a lab at the lafd. we will be encouraging organizations like you to come and see the real time information, play with it. .e're creating a petrie dish it is what some legal call america's disaster theme park. we'll sir that would agencies

throughout our state and nation. >> we will go to the audience and make sure we cover everything that you want to cover in this panel. do we have any other points before that? >> i love what you are saying about the gap between recovery and response. there was an interesting story in a book about one of the hospitals in detroit who overhauled their hold emergency room, realizing that their job was not really to help people, but to give them assurance. it sounds like semantics, but what they did is say, he'll be ok. once they figured that out, they were able to treat -- and figure out who was in the most need. >> questions from the audience.

you pick. >> i am from -- @digital sister on twitter. we talked a little bit about cultural norms. we asked, how you change and social aspects of social media -- the thinking that people have come of the fears that keep people from using these tools as emergency response. what are some suggestions to get over them? >> i think some of that will happen over time. there is a reason we do not use beta max anymore. when you communicate with your friends and family on twitter or facebook, you have some who say they refuse to be on the grid. that is fine. whatever the network is, maybe not facebook in five years --

who knows what will be available and how content will be published five years from now? it is more important to understand how people choose to communicate, in terms of sending data, and how people choose to receive data. how do you reach those people? i do not know what those channels are in five years, but the web will be a big part of that. >> in 9/11, you saw people posting fliers around the city. >> where do we start? at our discussion, the networks seem to be in place. from an institutional standpoint, where do we start? >> i suggest you start with local issues. a water main break in the neighborhood. we have big, corporate things.

there are small disasters. you have to start -- the benefit of the incident command system is that it is modular and scalable. do not try had -- the first time you get together, do not try to have it be something like first -- like hurricane katrina. we create a water cooler moments -- the water cooler moment. the great community will happen. i want to create apostles -- people who can preach the gospel of wellness, safety, and productivity. that means taking in data and information -- things that actionable and memorable. unless it's clear, don't drink it, dear. that is how we remind people of that after a disaster. >> i have a story about instant

messenger. it started with 40 people. they released it november 1, 1996, to 40 people. it got to hundreds of millions of people in less than one year and sold for hundreds of millions of dollars. you can change the world with 40 people. you have to find the right 40 people. if you have a twitter account, you are probably one of the right people, because you will get the message out. i do not know what resources my neighbors have. do they have generators, stockpiles of food that we could share, medical equipment, medical knowledge? i do not know, even on my street. start local, start small. start with something you can bite off and chew. >> we would love to see examples like seeclickfix.

we would love to have that localized. when you are near a disaster, a message will pop up asking if you want to participate. you give it an option of what you want to do. would you walk down the street and take pictures of the homes? that way, my disaster recovery teams know what is untenable and what is tenable. we cannot start creating new applications and hope people will use them. the only things that are going to work are the things that people use each and every day. we need to build those things to scale well. it will immensely help the recovery, response, preparedness, and mitigation phases. >> we also talked about this at our table. from the ground up, it is very evident how that could be helpful. start local, start small. start with groups at the workplace. the younger and newer hires who

know how to use this stuff can shoot it up the flagpole. a lot of us, within our organizations, we can see it from the top-down level. there are conversations that can still happen. what is our current structure for delivering aid and carrying out our jobs? how do we reconcile that with the open nature of the internet? there are policy questions to address, especially on the government level. we all want to participate in this together. that is another conversation that can still happen. >> another thing. as you get started -- and of the point is about digital and social data -- the other channels you use, whether it is radio, television, print -- they should also be in line with what is being said online.

there is information that could be fraudulent. it could be a hoax. we talked about digital strategy after katrina. my boss said, everyone is sitting in their car on the way the houston. let's talk about a radio strategy. we need to make sure the radio is also timed with print, television, and every other communication. sometimes, digital is in its own bucket and is not correlated. that could cause problems online and off. >> i have a systems preparedness blog. i could use some hits. i was curious. some of the point sthat -- points that were made look to push preparedness, get people in advance, before crisis.

we also talked about what is realistic. as we approach national preparedness month, what do you think is realistic? this is a great panel. as we redefine what preparedness is -- it is not just those three steps -- we are adding a third piece. what is realistic to ask the citizens and public to know in advance? we're talking about broadening into communities that are underserved. are there things to know? are there a few steps? what would you recommend this month and going forward as far as adding this piece to the basic things you should know as

a prepared citizen in the u.s.? >> you are one of my heroes. we will get your url out. if you understood his story of being here today, it would bring a tear to your eye. he has been through a hell of a lot. thank you. [applause] >> i want to put out a call to action. go to the front of your telephone directory and read the self-help instructions. if anyone here is from that industry, we need to stress that the self-help instructions need to be put in the smart phone, residing on the phone, so that people can help themselves. there is no reason it cannot be installed. just knowing how to turn off

your utilities, dealing with contaminated water -- it should be amended for every carrier in this country to use a little bit of space for that. i hope we can have a call to action so that every smart-phone as american red cross-approved information easily available to us all. >> that is a good idea. [applause] >> i have epocrates on my phone. it shows me drug prescription interactions. i interviewed a surgeon at stanford. he said everything he knows has completely changed in 30 years. he said, everything i learned in the school school is obsolete -- in medical school is obsolete. the reason i keep up with my craft is because of the apps on my pohne -- phone. he is taking cell phones around the world in handing them out to

doctors. he says that takes those communities out of no knowledge to stanford knowledge. >> let me make a declaration. we can no longer afford to work at the speed of government. [applause] >> i >> when we talk about reaching out to underserved communities, i would like to see the next summit deal with some of the communities that are most affected. i am sure you have lots of them permission about that. we have asked people from those communities, how do you get informational in your in a crisis? what do do? where do you go? we have to be asking those

questions and not just talk down, we are the experts, we help the public, a frame of mind. [applause] >> the thing you just talked about is a very compact piece of knowledge in a short space. for everyone here who has little bit of tight, powerful knowledge, can you put that out so that it is available for people who are transmitters in their communities. hey, if this happens, tweet best. put this on your facebook. if you cud district -- if you

could distribute knowledge like that, that would be very helpful. >> there are only two things you need to be able to answer. the thing i am most proud up ... four the thing i most need to learn epilepsies -- or, at the thing i most need to learn ... >> we can no longer afford to operate under the motive of a for-profit business. >> the other maxxam i am probably most well known for is defining government to point up. we start shoveling money and stop ingenuity -- government 2.0 we start shoveling money and

stop ingenuity. information wants to be free. >> how do you incorporate social media into an incident command system? >> that is a great question. i do mention of the national response from mark as a document that is very easy to -- response framework as a document that is very easy to read. safety, information and liaison are the three keys. now the we are beginning to see that we have to begin to do real-time monitoring, what we do, because we have the commander here, we get a lot done. we get back information as necessary. the command system probably needs to grow information to its full and complete section. there is a movement afoot to

make that happen, to have a much larger, much more well-defined. >> we did not follow those guidelines. we did not know them, but our war room was designed exactly like that. i was talking to people around the world, and they were bringing in information i did not know. there was a guy in london to new more than we did. we went to the desk, found the information and it was invaluable in that kind of crisis system. you have to solve a problem with a different group of people around the world, and solve it together. >> i used to use it as a drinking game, if i say the word one more time.n" you have to filter and factor in the human factor. >> there are sites that will help you with that job.

they will let you gather tweets, at of value, and give a report -- at a value, and give a report. -- add a value, and give a report. >> the back story for you, in terms of starting l.a. ft in 2006 -- lafd in 2006, that was

way ahead of government and most media. what inspired you to start that then, and what have you seen for the citizens of l.a.? >> we started at the dhs event. they were flipped out about what was happening in the back of a van. how they realized, that this is not department information or media information, this is public indignation. we decided to use the tools to keep the public informed, to create a community. we found a great benefit. the return investment has been people who -- a fellow public information officer and i were in a starbucks in plain clothes. a fire truck went by. everyone was wondering where it was going. the woman serving coffee said,

"do not worry. it was a significant, the fire department would have tr it."ed about de we have to get different channels. they continue to bifurcate. if you do not care for the actual and use it properly, it will become a weapon against your mission and your organization. >> i have a question around the underserved communities. we discussed here how to get people to help, and whether there should be formalized network or something that happens naturally. for me, i usually hear that will happen naturally, which is assuming that you can reach everybody and that you have reached every community or every

influence there in that community. my question to the panel is, what do you think about whether there should be a formalized trust network where there are agencies to know the to get in contact with, or those that have the repository of helpfulness, whatever the case may be? >> i think it is a both/and. that is a cheap way of answering the question. if you rely on a reporter to get their job done, they will get it done really quickly. there are people they go to all the time to get information. you need that, otherwise the news would not happen and things would not get done. you also need a grass-roots network, it seems to me. some stories never get tall. and never get told.

-- some stories never get told. it is not that we are trying to intentionally leave people out of the conversation. we are trying to reach out to different parts of the community. it just does not happen. there are groups and los angeles like global voices who are trying to figure out how to bring people into the conversation so that we really can realize the democratizing power of the internet, but i think we have a long way to go. >> this morning at 7:00 a.m., there was an enormous storm in montgomery county where i live. i was about to get in my car and drive down here, and my father in law called me to tell me that their had fallen on house and it was being flooded.

i called 911. no one picked up. my wife called and no one picked up. my in-laws called and no one picked up i started using twister -- i started tweeting. some people responded and tried to help with information, but no emergency responder picked up. i had people responding to had tens of thousands of followers. they were reposing and trying to get me information. it made two and a half hours to get here. weeting as trees were falling. obviously, we're talking about

the future and amazing things. but how do we get the help today? books whereildren's firefighters keep showing up, there is only a finite number of responders. every single one of them was out in the field and doing something, so no one was on the telephone. ideally, when you use twitter, you get feedback about how many people are in front of you. then he will decide if you should use self-help or the people in the community. ideally, there is someone who can reach out to you, someone with a power saw, someone who can help. we want to be there for you. >> i will just mention that reaching the insurance company, getting the quote, getting some out there, was a cinch. there still has not been someone who has come emergency-wise.

>> we cannot and on that note. -- end on that note. >> that is what we're talking about, right? we are going to be in situations where we have to build our own network out in the field. in the 1998 earthquake it was amazing. normal citizens went out and started directing traffic. it was great to see, and then we all went back to our lives and started being jerks to each other again. it was good to watch for a couple of days. >> not to belabor the point, but part of this is active listening. part of every conversation is not just talking, but listening, learning and acting. who is to say that a year from now -- i have noticed that if i tweet out that in atlanta, the

restaurants i am visiting -- that i am at lunch, the restaurants i am visiting are twitter.owing me on it twitt >> if i might add, you cannot have fear of failure. many of you will see projects completed. some of you will not. but somebody has to take risks. i know that all of us are willing to take reasonable risks inside the organization to make the magic happen. >> any more questions? >> i think we have one right here. >> what can social media nerds do to help during the next

crisis? how can we avoid creating more noise? >> i saw this happen on microsoft during katrina. a team was called by the red cross. they said, we have these names. we need a database built. we need information about families. the team came here and work on it. that is one way, just be attend. what are the names? what does the red cross me during a crisis? i am counting on first responders to talk to us. with katrina victims, because of something like that, there was a need. somebody saw the need and said, hey we can store a lot of people here. that turned into help for people. >> the best advice i have ever gotten is that a disaster is not

a place for business cards. one of the best things people can do to minimize the noise is to get involved in preparation and preparedness. we are making mistakes. we are flying by the seat of our pants. we welcome input and support of criticism when we are not meeting your needs. again, do not wait for the earth to shake. do not wait for the flood waters to rise. reach out tomorrow to the men and women in your neighborhood, the red cross volunteers, the corporate leaders in your community, and ask that you can help now. >> there is a network of services that need seeks to build more systems that build on it their mission. look for opportunities to do night and weekend coating for organizations like that. -- coding for organizations like

that. >> there was an idea of setting up a digital corp. we really need something immediately, that there would be a repository of people that we could deploy, sitting at their desks at the time. i think it is a brilliant idea. >> we are working on some things as well. and virtual usa is working on a common operating picture for response agencies. there will be social media interaction. hopefully, by this time next year, for our next summit, it will be put together. >> i just want to answer that question too. if you are interested in helping, please join creative

crisis camp. anyone can do it. that is exactly what this organization has been created. there are people all around the world doing it right now. a handful of people have created social media managers without borders. >> i just wanted to say, i was watching twitter, and the l.a. times has reported an earthquake in ecuador. we might get some practice before we thought we would. i want to speak to women's roles in disaster. my experience in kosovo, a remember sitting in a discussion about food distribution, which is scary, knowing that women are the ones most reliable to take care of everybody. in a lot of situations, men were using things like food to reward and punish. those things cannot be underestimated.

gdn.org is the gender and disaster network online. >> very cool. [inaudible] >> i would just like to point out that some of the models already exist. for example, fema used to gather information about different response agencies so that they hip pockets in certain regions so that if something happened, they could reach out and grab those people. maybe this is something in that fema and the american red cross should put together. grab those people better innovators on the internet, and say, here is where you need to be. this is the best resource. these are the guys who will be called during an emergency. if you want to help, contact us.

>> one organization has brought together many of lawyers and law students in the community so that if they need to put out a call, as there are people ready to do research on government issues. it is something very similar to what we can do in the disaster community. >> what the geeks can do, you know, government can higher to do coding. you can slide your credit card in and have somebody do it. you can watch them as they are doing it on your screen. >> [unintelligible] [laughter] >> been disasters, a lot of rules get rewritten -- in disasters, a lot of rules get

rewritten. you can pay people around the world to do things. there was a microsoft executive who got lost sailing and died. we never heard from him again, but they used mechanical terms to have people look at images of the ocean to see if they could learn anything about where he went or what happened to him. >> i want to speak to jack's issue as well. after a crisis in los angeles, and we expect a major earthquake at some point in time, we know there will be a crisis element there, we feel like the infrastructure may not support it. we hope that people in the crisis camp organization will move themselves physically to arizona, colorado and other places and bring the local knowledge right into those other camps. nothing will take the place of that. your knowledge, your intrinsic ability can also be physically used in other places. do not limit yourself just to

the digital presence. coming from being an emergency manager myself, this is a marathon and not a sprint. right now, people are saying this group, this group, this group. i have participated in some of them myself. all of the federal, work groups, grant stuff. the problem is, we are spinning our wheels. we of limited resources, limited time. if i have to respond and work with 15 different online communities, that is no different than the working with 15 different public agencies. we need to stop saying we need to do another group, another on- line, we need to focus on the groups that are established now and interconnected them so we can now work, as a technical person myself, we need to work together to build

emergency community back up. when he made a comment about the speed of government, we are far behind. we need help now to get established and move forward. how is the online group's connecting to the far behind emergency responder groups? >> one thing i did not hear it today it was anything about emergency data exchange language. that has become an alerting protocol. we do not have enough people like you and those groups. we have people like me, wearing fire helmet. we need more people like you, with common learning protocol. we have to use social media tools and make sure they have the edxl on them. >> if you are a response

agency, and your job is to help people, and the people you're helping may not be techniques -- tech geeks, they will still want to help you when the disaster happens. after the fort hood shootings recently, people flooded us with, how can i help? i want to help. give us a direction. tell us something we can do. they fled our blogs -- a flood of our blogs. you can start the conversation early and start thinking, how can we tell people, or give people a way to volunteer for us if that happens? they may not be the peaks, but they can help. -- the geeks, but they can help.

>> if there is a system where walmart can say, hey we need help building something, and the community gives ideas, and the community ranks them, and the employee's rank them. over time, i could see something like that being used to figure out how to get ideas from your field. you do not have all of the ideas, or all of the things that red cross needs. some worker in san antonio my nose something that they need that you do not know. how can you -- might know something that they need that you do not know. how can you build a system for that? >> when you're talking about mergers and collaboration, you're not just talking about technology. you're talking about egos and power structures. but just to get a plug for the i wask non-profit bhopaook,

so pleased that it was not a book about technology. it was a book about culture. how could you not see yourself as being an organization with a wall in front of it and the public outside that wall? how do you become a facilitator? maybe it is a lofty goal, but i think if we want to get more people involved in taking ownership and being empowered, we have to deal with some of those issues in our organizations. we cannot be the fortress nonprofit or government anymore. >> i think that is a great place to end this discussion. thank you so much. it is a great panel, and i hope you got a lot out of it. [applause] c-span2 c-spa

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> we are live now at the center for american progress here in washington for an event with investigative journalist and author jeremy scahill. this is live coverage on c-span. >> we took a field trip to gettysburg, and we had to get on a bus of 5:30 a.m., and the bus driver gets on the p a, and he says, "hello, my name is a

vernon. i am not mr. vernon. vernon is my christian name. i will be happy to answer any questions about sightseeing." one student who had some disabilities raised his hand and said, is this bus hard to drive? vernon said, "that has nothing to do with sightseeing." this shaped my understanding of the value of journalism. this kid was asking about public safety, and the bus driver was stonewalling. that is the lesson of the story. we started campus progress six years ago with what we believe is a clear mission, help young

people make their voices heard on issues that they care about. your generation, we believed, is capable and creative endeavors. we believe that campus progress could help you help your generation become a stronger force for positive, progressive change. campus progress advocates of national policy issues like clean energy, affordable education, immigration and equality. we also support local activism campaigns with training, advice and other resources. but the first thing we did as campus progress was not an advocate or advocacy program, it was a journalism program. we started supporting the training of young journalists like you. it was and still is our strong belief that advancing the work of our young and journalist is every bit as important, if not more important, then helping young activists to get started.

you all do not need to be sold on the excitement of working in journalism, or on its importance in our society and democracy. we must have a media that investigates and publishes stories. in a note that genuinely -- you know that genuinely great reporting also comes under fire, sometimes from corporations, from criminals, from terrorist, and quite often, from government bent on suppressing information, including, unfortunately too often, the united states. you know that people lose their freedom and often their lives in pursuit of this work. you also know that the journalism business is in trouble, with newspapers literally shrinking before our eyes, closing bureaus. there are more junk and gossip newspapers emerging can we need.

we are look to you to stand up for the importance of real journalism. we left you stand up for fairness and a rigorous three -- we look to you to stand up for fairness and rigorous reporting. there are some of the great publications still publishing, and if you have that story and know how to publish it, the internet means that you can get it out there to people who are paying attention. there are all kinds of stories to tell about government, politics, business, science and art. there is also a lot of lying and cheating out there, bullying, corruption, and also innovation and progress. there are good things to hide. -- good things to highlight. i thank you for being here. i thank you for working with campus progress. with that, i want to introduce my colleague to come up and talk

a little bit more about what we do and why we like working with you. thank you so much. [applause] >> but after then. -- good afternoon. i am and the manager of the campus progress public advocacy it department. thank you so much for being here. i believe that in the progressive movement, there are a lot of important roles to be played. as an advocate, i can say that the work of journalism advocate is both very independent and very strong and mutually respected. advocates rely very heavily on the work that journalism does, to investigate and shed light on the abuses and trams that happen in various faraway places. -- and try amps that happen in various faraway places. -- triumphs that happen in

various far away places. there are very few things that are more satisfying to an advocate than to have their name quoted in an article or blog, or to have an editorial written about an issue that they have been advocating for for the past six months. we discovered the benefit of journalists and advocates working together earlier this year when campus progress coordinated efforts and were able to get a number of editorial pieces featured calling on u.s. senators to support student loan reform that would end the wasteful federal education loan program that was patting the pockets of bankers, and to reroute that money toward affordable loan prepayment programs.

we saw an associate of campus progress right an investigative piece to expose the unscrupulous practice of state -- of the bankers at sallie mae you were using -- you were using fear tactics to fight that loan reform. as the impact of the blogosphere grows, the need for independent and progress of journalism and voices is going to be amplified. your role in the progressive movement is necessary now more than ever, as well as the relationship between advocates and journalists. you have a unique opportunity and a platform to help with the and told stories of our generation, and to create shock waves that will resonate and the hearts and minds of the american people moving forward.

with that, i will introduce one of your colleagues. [applause] >> hello. the importance of independent journalism and a functioning democracy cannot be overstated. public access to information, all available information, is paramount in order for a democracy to be accountable and honest. espite the efforts of 24 ouhour news entertainment that has turned journalism into a spectator sport, journalism is still alive and well. public speaker is a fellow and a supporter of democracy now, as well as a contributor to nation magazine.

he has written a best-selling novel about blackwater. he has received awards for his journalism, and he offers a perspective on why we need to continue the tradition of truly independent journalism. i am pleased to present our keynote speaker. [applause] >> thank you for that. as you know, c-span is broadcasting this. the waitress to them "-- the way we tricked them into that is because i am announcing my candidacy for first man of alaska. i am talking to you levite. . [laughter] thank you for hosting this conference and for making scholarships available too many young people who come here to study journalism.

these are difficult times for the media industry. we see newspapers going under. but it is not just a crisis of economics, it is also a crisis when it comes to quality reporting. fo-tainment nd in society where people pose as media figures that would have once been cconsidered journalists. is it is on fox. we are addicted to reality tv culture. we have become so dumb down as a society that what happens to the kids from the jersey shore or the house lives becomes reality. what is happening in a war sound is somehow relegated to the back -- and a war zone is

somehow relegated to the back pages of the newspaper. journalists are now lager just imbedded with troops, they are now also increasingly embedded with the ideologically powerful. i spoke to a journalist who was going to go on vacation with president obama. there was a discussion about whether he would wear a speedo. it is a friday. things may be slow. but the reality is, if you look at how much time is spent, i am talking about news channels, spent discussing totally irrelevant issues about the personal lives of politicians, talking about swim wear, and posting pictures of joe biden

having a super soakers with rahm emanuel, how are you expected to report critically on those people? there is an incredible coziness between journalists and the powerful in this country. what we need desperately right now, and this is what i consider the main thing that i want you to take away from this conference, we need a new generation of hungry journalists. we need a new generation of journalists -- i do not mean it literally. i want you to eat. [laughter] i mean hungry for the truth. we need journalists who are willing to be embedded. there is no objectivity and journalism. that is a fiction we need to get over. "the new york times" is not objective. they were a conveyor belt for the allies of the powerful and the propaganda of the rich.

here in the united states, but also around the world, journalists must be willing to get away from their computers, willing to get away from telephones, and actually go to a war zone and examine the people who live on the other side of the gun that is u.s. foreign policy. i do not care how distasteful is to see the days of war with your morning coffee. until journalists show the american people that, these wars are going to continue on and on. we have a responsibility in a democratic society, as journalists, to have a conscience. we do not need he said-she said journalism. there needs to be part and a to full commission. holding people accountable, and giving voice to the voiceless.

i found a really fascinating that the white house this spokesperson lashed out against people the called the "professional left" for comparing some of president obama's policies to those of the bush administration. it was the president himself who said, "if i win, i wanted to hold me accountable -- i want you to hold me accountable." there are many ways in which this white house policies are as bad as the bush administration's or worse. it should be the position of journalists to a point that out and hold this president accountable, and to not be mocked by one of the most powerful officials in washington toward doing so. i believe that journalists have an ethical and moral responsibility to be as critical

of people they like you are in power as they are of people who they dislike when they're in power. our courage, our bravery, our ethics are defined when we criticize those we actually like you are in power. -- who are in power. the reality is that this administration has kept guantanamo open, has denied habeus corpus to prisoners around the world. the prison in afghanistan has become like guantanamo. this president has gone further than president bush in defending the right of the government to spy on its citizens. indeed been lawsuits brought during the bush era -- it intervened in lawsuits brought during the bush era to stock of wiretapping of citizens. -- stop wiretapping of citizens.

under the patriot act, there is no law that can dismantle the state secrets act that the president keeps invoking. this is devastating to the issue of privacy and civil rights in this country. the obama administration, in the form of a speech the president gave last year, has but for the right of the government of the united states to detain people around the world indefinitely, without charge, and without any hope of a trial. this administration also has asserted the right to spy on the united states citizens. anwar al-awlaki is a terrible man. but he is a u.s. citizen and he

has rights to due process. he should have due process before he is assassinated in a covert operation carried out by the cia or the joint special operations command. the treasury department said you cannot do that. they blocked lawyers from representing him for free, because they said they would be violating treasury department regulations, even if they did it for free. they had to studio, administration, and finally they were allowed to represent this man -- they had to sue the obama administration, and finally they were allowed to represent this man, a u.s. citizen. i started calling progressive democrats, people who, if bush was doing this, would have spoken out. no one would return a call. no one would do anything about it. dennis kucinich, if you read the

bill that he introduced, saying that the united states should not be targeting people for assassination, is simply saying that he wants the country to respect the constitution. out of the hundreds of democrats that served in congress, do you know how many co-sponsored that legislation? 5. that shows the utter lack of character in the government right now, when you cannot even get democrats to stand up against the prosecution of a citizen without due process. we have dramatically escalated the conflict in afghanistan. each month is clear than the last. -- is bloodier danville last. -- than the last. in pakistan there is more than

just a problem with flooding. you have a covert u.s. war where special forces are engaged in black operations. in pakistan, every week, they're using predator drones and reaper drones. some of this is done by the military through the joint operations command, some of the cia. many people believed this administration would take on the issue of a radicalized private owar. very little in u.s. military policy has changed. blackwater got a new contract last month. this firm is so closely linked to the bush administration that they probably share a straw with dick cheney in other milkshake.

milkshake.ere milkshain their this is a country that has been involved in our right killing -- a company that has been involved in outright killing. five people directly under the owner of a that the company are being investigated by practically everybody of the yet thisovernment', and administration continues to give blackwater these contracts. secretary of state hillary clinton, when she was running for president, became the second sponsor in the senate of legislation to ban these companies. when she was running, she said she would ben blackwater. now, as secretary of state, she

is asking for a doubling of the blackwater work force in iraq. if you read the communications coming out of the state department and looked at the request from the state department to the pentagon, you will see that the secretary of state is asking for a pair of militarization of u.s. diplomatic activity in iraq, with a monstrous u.s. embassy in baghdad. it will be the size of vatican city. that necessitates a massive para-military force. the secretary of state has asserted that the united states intends to have an enduring presence around iraq. we're seeing a back door continuation of the iraqi occupation by using a private contractor.

there are currently 250 cows and private contractors -- 250,000 private contractors operating alongside a lower number of troops. right now, the united states has more private sector individuals on its payroll putting these wars than it does u.s. soldiers. 70% of the combined budgets of the intelligence agencies is used to purchase services or goods from private contractors. 69% of all the people employed by the empire department of defense -- the entire department of defense are private contractors. we have heard a lot lately about wikileaks. the person suspected of releasing 90,000 documents from the afghan war to wikileaks is a 22-year-old former are the intelligence analyst. i reviewed his online chat that he had with a hacker in

government employment. what is clear from the chap that those individuals had -- chat that those individuals had, was that what he believed he was doing by releasing these documents, including some task force papers related to military presence in guantanamo, what he cites as his motivation is a belief that people need to see what is in those documents. he said he could have gone broke end sold them to china or and sold gone rogue them to china or russia, but you believe that information should be free. what he does not say is that he leaked the document. he has already been convicted

before he has gone to trial. the person released to the pentagon papers during the vietnam war has called him a hero. congressman mike rogers of michigan called for him to be executed. the former speechwriter for president bush said he wants to have the founder of wikileaks rendered by special forces and brought to trial. this is one man that had access to secret documents. they were not top-secret. there were secret. they were of a lower classification than what many private contractors have access to. there are over 800,000 employees of private companies that have access to top-secret documents. these individuals are not in the united states army. they're not in the military, and

they're not employees of the government. their private contractors. these individuals, on a regular basis, have access to some of the most sensitive intelligence gathered and produced in this country. they simultaneously work for the u.s. government, for foreign governments, and for multinational corporations. what is to say that there wasn't a security breach from one of those individuals? of the real question we have now in terms of national security is not about bradley manning. it is about the radical outsourcing of our national security policy to for-profit corporations to answer to their bottom line and profits more than they do to their flag and their country. and yet almost no one talked about that on capitol hill. it is a non issue. why? because of the campaign finance issue in this country. war is business and business is good. democrats and republicans alike take huge contributions from the

war industry. it is the responsibility of journalists to reveal information. this is not about partisanship. it is about the consistency of our profession. we are the people responsible, journalists, for providing intimation to citizens -- providing information to citizens in this country and around the world that will empower them to make their own decisions. my advice to you would be to be the new generation of an indebted journalists. blogging is great. reading is fun. it is cool to think of working in a news room somewhere. whenever you're interested in doing -- whatever your interested in doing, whatever we need right now is courageous young journalists you're willing to go out into the field and gather the stories that no one else is gathering. be the voice of the people that otherwise would not have a voice. the unpopular journalist, the one that asks a complicated

question at a press conference when everyone else wants to go home. the one who says i do not want to cavort with the powerful. i do not care about barbeques and i do not need to be near rahm emanuel with a super soakers. i want to be the one who asked the tough questions. one of the best journalists in this country is someone you've probably never heard of. he is an independent journalist at a production house called big noise film. spent the better part of the past decade going in and out of the rock -- of a iraq, not embedded. he tells the story of people killed in night raids, of people left without gas or to come out of windows. people all around the world in combat zones. part of the reason you have never heard of him is because his work is almost never shown in this country. reports largely for

international media outlets. most of the rest of the world sees a very different war than we see in this country. the troops are an important part of this story and i want to know where david petraeus is saying. but just as important, what are afghan citizens saying that that is the reality show i want to see. that is the reality tv show that could change the way things are. corporations will not by the ads for it. people will flip the channel. but we, young journalists, we need to challenge that system. we need to break the chain of this reality tv, info-tainment society. that is the challenge for all of you.

thank you for being here. i look forward to your questions. [applause] >> i am from the boston college gavel. i was wondering how you thought the notion of media has been influenced by the proliferation of media? on a 24-hour network, how much news today actually have? >> if you watch cable news, you'll see much more of that then you will watching a network newscast at night. unfortunately, what could have been a good thing, in terms of proliferation of the 24 hour news cycle and the rise of cable news, has turned into a disaster. i think it has helped to a

number of people and i think it has really dumb down the news -- i think it has helped to numb people and i think it has a really dumbed down the news. an unfortunate reality is that one of the stalwarts of news, pbs, is now brought to by sponsors. the rise in power of right-wing media outlets has caused a fox newsization. msnbc has become talking points for liberals or talking points from the white house versus being a truly independent outlets at once to hold power accountable. i think a big part of the

problem is the coziness of the press corps with a powerful. i think we're seeing it in a much more pronounced way under this administration, because quite frankly, i think journalists like this president more. they like to hang out with white house officials. they are their friends. that is why you're seeing a reflection of their inside the beltway echocoziness on television. the flip side is, i think there is a great deal of independent media being produced. democracy now is easily the biggest independent media product into the country. it is on television and radio every day in this country. many journalists are doing great work. the challenge is, how do you get it out to a wider audience? that is one of the point of this conference, and while i am so happy to see so many of you here. -- why i am so happy to see so

many of you here. >> earlier you talked about entertainment as news. as journalists, how do we write things that are important but also appealing? for example, if i want to write about something of importance, how do i write it so the people enjoy reading it but are also informed? that is a problem most of the time. it is important, people would rather hear about the jersey shore. >> i think that is a big challenge right now. you're raising an issue that is one that i think all of us that are already working media aspire to a regular basis. a lot of stories are written for a certain group of people in this country. that is an unfortunate reality. i do not think there is a lot of serious journalism being in that

young people, for instance. there is an utter lack of cultural understanding of the way things are on the part of the established media outlets. one thing this generation could really do, this generation of journalists, is to combine some of the exciting new >> is a dying breed. i think we need more narrative, non-fiction in our journalism, where you are telling stories of real people. real people are exciting. that is why this voyeuristic culture has become so addictive. you rarely see their real lives of people whose stories indicate something broader about what is happening in the country. i think we need to also be very mindful in the culture of new media not to step away from what was essential in journalism --

fact checking, peer review added in. part of it is finding stories that speak to the experiences of the people you're trying to reach. that is one of the great things that people -- is one of the challenges. i think it would be a great thing is more young journalists started writing from a heart, telling the story of great people. you can almost call what some of the tools of that voyeuristic culture, and make it real, so to speak. >> haley cohen -- how you balance the more powerful journalist? >> you do not. i will tell you a true story.

i have been to every democratic and republican convention since 1996. i always feel like a kid at a candy shop with a press credential because all of these people that refuse to return my calls, there are all stuck in a confined space. i am known as a super-nerd. i have of the faces of congress and recognized. we're literally casing these people from the hallways. every four years, it is my party. if you look to the work we did on the democracy now have both of those conventions, that was one of the things we were doing in 2008. we're asking the democrats about the democratic platform, and some overlapping similarities with the bush administration policies,

particularly foreign policy. there is very little difference on foreign policy. at the republican convention -- the same thing -- going after the politicians for his policies that have endorsed, the things they said, votes that they've passed, money that they have taken from corporate donors -- you have to pick which side you will cast your live with. powerful people do not like being asked uncomfortable questions. i think that as part of the reasons why there is a pay-to- play climate in washington, where there is a line that will never be crossed, and must the person is so battered in public that it is safe to cross them. if you look at what has happened with charlie rangel, there was a lot of reluctance to go after him. once he became a punching bag, the gates were open.

i think that as a lot of what happens in washington. one person does, and it opens the gate. i think it is more important to keep your accuracy than it is to go with the powerful. >> and gerald johnson -- i want to know how the proposed global-verizon proposed net neutrality effect young journalists'ability to do proper news? >> i think this is one of the premier issues facing journalism and young people in this country. young people will inherit a far less democratic internet that -- that currently exists. if these corporations are allowed to make access to certain sites much easier, or promote those sites in a way

that really on levels the playing field of the internet, i think it will be disastrous. that is one of the reasons why you have seen so much -- so many independent organizations joined in loss of -- lawsuits about that. that is why the electronic frontier foundation and others have tried to litigate the wiretap stock as well. all of this is ultimately under the umbrella of the decrease in our civil liberties. part of our civil liberties includes having a vibrant, a democratic media. i think every young journalist should be very have been very active in opposing the. it would be disastrous. these corporations are getting more and more powerful by the moment. there is an incredible -- there

is a book being written that started off as a history by media started and owned by people of kant the people of color in this country. what it has turned into is a history of the media consolidation. the two have been intertwined. the destruction of black newspapers, the targeting of mexican media outlets is also a story of the consolidation. i would encourage people to look out for that. it is a serious issue. thank you for raising that. >> i am francis from ucla. i was wondering, what is some good domestic in general the -- domestic journalism that we can be reading. >> matt mclaughlin, from ", mother jones -- "mother jones"

has been the best reporter by far on the oil spill. the reason that her journalism has been so powerful is that because she is telling the stories of people whose lives are effected by at in a way that is so much more detailed and real than what you see, even in visual media, and also holding a corporation and the government accountable. i think if you look at the reporting that is being done by on economic issues in this country, i think the magazine is getting better and better every year. if you are talking about bill prison industrial complex in this country, or racial issues in this country, "color lines is an amazing group of people.

"left turned" which was built up by a number of people in the gulf, you will see stories that are not often covered by corporate media outlets. that is part of what i was getting to before, when the man was asking about journalism that translates into the culture and what people are interested in. it depends what culture you are a part of. lars accommodate, corporate media outlets are directing news coverage -- largely, big, corporate media outlets are directing news coverage that well-off white people. that is a big problem with journalism today. >> hi. many people in this room, most of the people in this room are in college. we are listening to you speak about this type of journalism that we are pretty excited about engaging in.

how would we as young journalists really break in? >> that is a very good question. the only way i think i could answer it -- i could tell you how i ended up accidently in the position of being a journalist -- i did not have a journalism degree. in fact, when i applied for an internship at a local the nation" -- "the nation, called i was the night. i do not even have a college degree. i decided that i wanted to do media. i stopped amy goodman for about a year. i offered to walk her dog, feed her cat, wash her windows. i think she was debating getting a restraining order or given the chance. eventually, she told me i could volunteer, but was not sure that

it would work out. i went in that day, and stayed for 14 hours. i never left. the first job i had in journalism, amy was paying me $40 a day to write the news headlines in the morning. i used to go again, and by all of these newspapers. -- i used to go in, and by all of these newspapers. i used to cut out newspapers from corporate media outlets before we had the internet. i would cross out the bad politics of "in the new york " and i basically buy my way into a newsroom. i learned the technical side of radio. i learned how do edit tape. i learned journalism as a trade, rather than as a profession or

academic study. literally, what i started doing, who was going to countries around the world, by begging for money from rich people, basically, and asking if they could pitch in $200 or $300 to go to iraq. i was not getting paid at all. the most i made was $14,000 in the 1990's one year. i was writing for free. i would e-mail dispatches to those places, tried to introduce myself. part of it was that i was not thinking about living, in terms of my financial situation, but i did not care. i wanted to be a journalist i felt that if i could not get a job somewhere, i would go try and do it. that does not work for to one. i was very fortunate and lucky.

he speaks to something deeper -- the idea of journalism as a trade, rather than a to reader. it has to be burning in your heart in some way or another. part of it is about what internships you can get, but part of it is about initiative, saying i'm going to try to raise $5,000 to go to lebanon for three or four months and see what happens, if that is the kind of journalism you want to do. a large part is not being willing to give up. the best journalists i know are people that ended up taking that road. i do not know many people that went the route of internships, assistance, bureau chief -- i do not know many people like that. most the people i know it is a way of life, not a career. i do not know if that is helpful. i need a lot of people that have that same path that they have taken in one form or another.

>> it seems to me that insurgent media is getting a lot of power. things like wikileaks. in the next five or 10 years, i would say we see more chaos in our americans than we do now, and you agree with it, and do you think it is a good thing? >> first of all, wikileaks is not a media outlet. in a way, it does not matter to the point you are raising. i think what andrew brightbart did it was apprehensible, and what james o'keefe did to acorn was reprehensible and racist. i think it was also shameful that the powerful democrat in both cases refused in real time

up and denounce what it was. having said that, i think you are right that you are going to see a lot more guerrilla tactics like we have seen with wikileaks. i would put that in a different category. that is more disingenuous, dishonest ambushing of people, and the targeting of people who in the case of air corps, i think those narratives were utterly force -- a corn, i think those there as work utterly false. look at the headlines caused by wikileaks. what is amazing is how the conversation has degenerated into a discussion almost exclusively about the names of afghans being lift -- listed in those documents. if i was releasing them, i would not have put the names out there. that is something only wikileaks

can answer. the idea that because they were released in the way they were, or because they did that, that they should not be subject -- subjected to a congressional investigation, or examined for what they say about the war and you take that and juxtaposed with the recent "time magazine cover were the young woman who had her nose and ears chopped off as a judgment of the taliban. the magazine does not ask the question but declares what happens if we leave afghanistan. -- they added six, four years dealt with the taliban. they helped create it. they funded the people that were responsible for september all

lend during the 1980's and 1990's. the discussion is about the brutality of the taliban, and what happens if we leave afghanistan. what the wikileaks documents should show is that there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis caused by our ongoing presence there. what happens if we stay? i think you'll see a clash of media civilizations, where you have the established, "time magazine" narrative, and then the insurgent guerrilla tactics of dumping doctors on the world, and doing it brilliantly, coordinating with the powerful media outlets. something that can be studied in journalism classes for years to come. >> enjoy, from campus progress. -- andrew, from campus progress.

he talked about how journalists are too close to senators. i wonder how that applies to college campuses, where students try to get close to administrators. burning a bridge for us and means that is the end of it. we will not get access if you step on toes. that is the end. no one is getting more access after that. >> part of the problem, and i suspect it is part of what you are saying -- many media outlets on campus are controlled in one form or another by the school. i think that is a very serious problem. there should be warm -- should be more moves to negotiate total autonomy for media outlets that are ultimately student-run. i could see in some cases weather needs to be faculty involvement for continuity, leadership, but, i do not think

that should be the moral challenge when you are talking about it. should be a logistical challenge. i think there would be nothing more noble than losing your job as a student journalist by legitimately taking down a corrupt official. that is real journalism. real journalists sometimes lose their job because of the risk that they have taken, and the stories that they have done. i think we need those kinds of courageous journalists that are willing to take those chances. it comes with consequences, but we could also systemically look at trying to negotiate greater autonomy for student-run media outlets. i remember at the university of wisconsin there were two big publications. one was controlled by the university and the other was

independently funded, and actually started by william f. buckley. it became an independent newspaper. i think it has substantially more independence than the more liberal-leaning paper on that campus did. in a way, it is a microcosm -- a microcosm of a media ownership in this country. for ank we have time fo couple more. >> i am from the "f word." is a way to force the truth on people, or is there another way on -- we can go about that. >> s stephen colbert said,

"truth has a liberal bias." [laughter] i think we can provide stories that have heart, and a narrative that might encourage them to be more active. i think there needs to be a barrier that is broken down, in a way, that separates people from many truths in this country. a large part of it is by providing them with information that empowers them. oftentimes, we are full of garbage on television. it is just nonsense and gibberish, instead of information people could use to change things. i keep coming back to the war because i think it is the clearest example we have. if we saw on a daily basis the consequences of the wars, i believe in a genuine goodness of people in this country. i think people would be furious and sad about what the war actually looks like.

>> i am julia fisher. i was wondering why it is that issues like blackwater are more important, or real journalism then something like snooki who shapes and reflects the commonly shared culture of the american people, and i say similar note, how is that smaller publications can address the information as a whole without reaching the entire population. >> at think a lot of people would disagree that snooki reflects our culture. [laughter] she is not running around

telling innocent civilians, and is not been funded with no-bid contracts by democrats and republicans alike. i think there is something to be said by the reality tv culture, and you might see that angle, into the story. if you look at corporate media coverage of the war over the past 10 years, you will see that most of the information is there, but it is left for you to connect the dots. "the new york times" and all of these media outlets have the reported on some of the things i'm talking about. it is all there. they're few and far between. there is no drum beat coverage to say to people this is actually something really important. we saw the impact of a drum beat

coverage in the lead up to the iraq war where you had a coordinated campaign between the administration and their allies in corporate media. they actually changed public perception and helped to leave the country into war. if we had the moral equivalent to that taken place on a daily basis, where people were really being presented with a message of urgency about these policies, i think we would see that it would not just the smaller, independent publications. i think we have moved away from that culture of journalists as protectors, in a way, of not only freedom of speech, but of access to information from the powerful. in terms of relevance, i think it is what has been drilled into people's had. reality has altered -- altered the culture. even despite its name, reality tv, the lives of others, all

called the housewives" -- "the housewives," whatever, it has contributed i think we will need to wrap up and about four minutes or so. >> i am with the michigan and the pennant. i was wondering if you could share your thoughts on lobbying in the world of journalism. i've noticed a tension bloggers can't be a journalist, etc. >> i think they can be. out and give some concrete examples. one of the people robert krebs was breached -- was expressing hit -- robert gibbs was expressing his objection to was

one of the best blockers we have. i do not know if he would identify himself that way, but he does to interviews with people, and a heckuva lot of people read him. he is funny, smart, and as a cultural understanding of what is happening across the board in this country, and around the world. i think it helps that he does not live here. he blogs from brazil, and covers the united states. i think that helps, because he does not get sucked into the that the washington culture. the other great unsung hero of on-line journalism is a young woman named martha c. wheeler. her body is a must-read. she regularly scoops -- herbs blog is a must read. she regularly scoops "the new york times." she has beaten them to a story.

if you look at the role that " talking points memo" has played, i think they have really changed the game when it comes to on- line journalism, by having serious reporters that are doing a combination of old-school journalism, muckraking, and blogging. i think it is one of the most exciting parts of being a young journalist, if you are tech savvy, because it is an open frontier. the best are the ones that are most serious about keeping intact what was good about old- school journalism. you need to have your facts straight. you have to check things. i don't think there should be a debate. it all has to do with the tool they are using. just because you're not getting printed on it print press does not mean you're not a journalist.

>> how can we, as student journalists, increase our credibility? are we are a muslim publication put a lot of our students are in iran, afghanistan, or whatever. let's say an event this takes place, and a student actually their reports something else. >> i think one of the big mistakes that powerful u.s. media outlets made when the united states was gearing up to invade iraq, and was already on the ground in afghanistan, was not building greater partnerships with media outlets in those countries, or those regions. the war on alger's era has been unbelievable. -- al jazzera has been

unbelievable. anyone who calls the network a terrorist organization, is an outrageously idiotic person, who has clearly not watched. it is the only media outlet that i am aware of that was killed -- kicked out of both bush's in rock, and obama's iraq. they could of informed public opinion is in a way that would be far more democratic than what we actually had by a willingness to team up on likely partners. the same thing can be done by his student journalists. i think it would be great if the publications that more outreach to student journalists, prickly those that are from abroad, or texas -- particularly those abroad, or have access. you can reach out and offer

those partnerships to bigger media outlets. i think it would be great. like i was saying, you need to be hungry. you have to keep trying. eventually, i think it will land. you have to be willing to hear "no" for someone says yes. i think we are wrapping up. thank you for coming and enduring this on such a nice washington, d.c. day of smog, fog, and sweat [laughter] . >> i wanted to end by issuing new a challenge in the form of reading is something that was done by the obama administration last year in the case that was brought by the center for constitutional rights on behalf of two prisoners that died at guantanamo.

this speaks to responsibility and the ethics of journalists. the assistant attorney general intervened in the case were to be will individuals have died -- had died and their families filed lawsuits against bobrun's fault and the share of the joint chiefs of staff under bush and other military officials. the obama administration intervened to exonerate donald -- donald trump steele and others -- rumsefield. what obama's assistant attorney general said in this case where there were allegedly cases of terrorist -- of torture, says the type of activities were foreseeable, and were an output of their responsibility to gain intelligence. it goes on to say that genocide, torture, and cruel, in

human, degrading treatment by individuals was in the scope of their employment. it was in the scope of those individuals. when robert gibbs attacks people for having the audacity to question some of the policies of the president, it is ultimately an attack on free media. the challenge is to always be consistent. be the same journalist you are when someone you like is in power, as when someone you do not like is in power. thank you for coming today. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> thank you, very much, jeremy, that was a terrific speech. which ticket five-minute break. to free to grab some what -- we are going to take a five-minute break. still free to grab some water. we will be right back.

>> here you are, senator. not a bad pass, either. is it? , either. >> when harry truman saw this movie, he hated this movie. he was seen as a center from the much -- as a senator from the pentagon's machine in kansas city. i wonder if he thought it was looking at him. >> sunday night, on c-span. this weekend, on booktv, the columbia university pro ball on the state of agitation in the united states and the effect of stereotypes of morning -- state

of education in the united states. on sunday, the former cia agent, who still requires his identity be shielded on how to deal with iran. also, our fall book pretty. for a list of programs, not fiction authors and books, visit booktv.org. tomorrow, on "washington l" harris miller will talk about the greater oversight for for-profit colleges. the effect of the dropping of the first atomic bomb o. cynthia kelly is our guest.

>> democratic congresswoman today insisted that there was nothing improper about her role in obtaining government funds for one the bank in california. the house ethics committee has been investigating the incident. following an opening statement, we hear detailed presentations. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. >> i wanted to thank you all for being here today. the press and the public have now had an opportunity to read the statement of alleged violations and have shown a lot of interest in the ethics matter

that is now pending before the committee on standards of official conduct. i am eager to be able to have an opportunity to present my case. that is why i have requested that the standards committee scheduled a hearing as soon as possible. unfortunately, the committee has not yet specified a date for a hearing on this matter, and given the congressional schedule, it is possible that no hearing will be held for months, even after the november elections. such a delay is unacceptable, considering that the investigation has dragged out for almost one year. it does not provide due process. it prevents my constituents and the american public from getting answers, and it delays me from being able to respond to the charges spells out. i am pleased that the committee released the related documents

early this week, as i have insisted after waiting my rights to have it remain public until the hearing. i have arranged this press conference to present my facts in the case, and clear up ambiguities and misinformation. i recognize the transparency that i am providing might not eliminate any judicatory hearing. to reiterate, i am anxious to share these facts with you and the public because i have not violated any house rules. i fully disclosed all of my financial information, as requested by house rules, and, in fact, went above and beyond what was required by repeatedly disclosing mine and my husband's financial interests during the committee hearing. neither my staff nor i engaged in improper behavior, did not

influence anyone, and did not gain any benefit. we are here today, because i believe my actions, and the allegations against me, are not easily understood. i want to be absolutely clear about one thing -- this case is not just about need. this case is about access. it is about access for those who are not heard by the decision makers, whether it is having their questions answered, or their concerns addressed. for the past 14 years, i have served in an elected office, both the state and national level. i have made one of my top priorities opening doors and providing access for small, minority- and women-owned businesses. my advocacy and assistance for providing access is why we are here today.

the national bankers association consists of 103 minority banks. i have worked with this association and their concerns for many years. i have spoken at their conventions on many occasions. i have participated in hearings about their issues, and i have worked with our federal agencies on their behalf, including the treasury department, the fdic, and fannie mae, and freddie mac. my telephone calls to the then secretary of the treasury, hank paulson, during the worst economic crisis this nation has faced in 80 years, was to provide access to the national bankers association, which was concerned about the fact that treasury had placed fannie mae and freddie mac into conservatorship. it was represented to me that many banks at also mortgaged

their capital in fannie and freddie, and the association wished to know whether or not there members capital was lost, where if the government was responsible or protesting -- for protecting the capital they have invested. they had attempted to get a meeting with the treasury department, but have received no response. they sought me out to assist them in setting up a meeting. the question at this point should not be why i called secretary hank paulson, but why i had to. the question at this point should be why a trade association, representing over 100 minority banks, could not getting meeting at the height of the crisis. when i contacted the treasury

secretary, i did not suggest a solution to the problem of the national bankers association. i did not ask for any favors for the national bankers association. i did not ask for a meeting, for any individual bank, included -- including one the united bank. i did not suggest who would be participants in that meeting. i did not attend that meeting, and there was no such thing as the troubled assets release program known as part at that time. there has been a great deal of confusion over a conversation i had with the financial services chairman, barney frank. the conversation i had with chairman frank is a conversation several weeks after this meeting had take plate -- taken place, and after the tarp program had been announced.

one united bank was now raising questions about assistance from tarp because my office's assistance to the national bankers association was strictly to provide access for a discussion about the impact of the financial crisis on small and minority banks, and because there was no tarp program at the time of the meeting, i did not wish to get involved with 1 united bank about any individual assistance, or about this new tarp program. because my husband had once served on the board of one united banks, and still held investments there, i felt i should seek assistance from chairman frank, a representative from the state where the bank was headquartered, and someone with a record of commitment to the health of minority banks. it is also important to note that no government agency or their representatives have ever

said that i requested any special assistance or compensation for anyone or any institution, or that i influence the tarp process in any way. there has also been a question about whether or not i instructed my staff not to get involved with one united banks, -- 1 united bank, and their interest in accessing tarp funds. my staff had been involved only did understand the impact on the -- of the financial crisis on small minority banks and assisting in setting up a meeting with the treasury department for, again, the national bankers association. i told my chief of staff that i have informed chairman frank about 1 united bank's interest and there were only concerned about small and -- minority banks broadly. given the e-mails that the

committee had offered as their evidence, we communicated with each other clearly. so, it is not just about us. it is above those who lack access. i was honored to serve on the conference committee of the wall street reform and consumer protection act. i am happy to say that much of the legislation that i offered -- authored the gave access and assistance for struggling and unemployed homeowners. it was included in the final legislation that was signed by president obama. i am particularly proud of the offices of minority and women inclusion that will be set up at the federal government's financial institutions, such as the fdic -- all of these

agencies continuing with my work about access, will now have these offices of minority and women in collusion. hear me clearly. because of the need for access, and the work that i have done over many years, i have now opened up new opportunities by creating the offices of minority and women assistance at the fdic, the treasury department, the federal reserve, among others, to deal with the historic lack of access that women and minority individuals and institutions have had in hiring, contracts and, an securement opportunities. over the past years, i and nine others congressional black caucus members of the financial- services committee have been meeting with the national

bankers association, the national newspaper publishers association, the national association of black owned broadcasters, the national association of minority automobile dealers, the national association of securities professionals, and the national bar association, among others, discussing the plight of minority businesses, their lack of access to capital, and their lack of support from their government in banking, advertising, and consulting contract. access is key to understanding the scope of this case. this case is not just about them. this case is about fairness. in fact, the investigative subcommittee ignored or disregarded key pieces of exculpatory access -- evidence exclusive to my case, and that is extremely troubling. truly robust processes was taken

all of the available evidence into consideration. i believe that if this had been done, we would not be here today. fairness is also key to understanding the scope of this case. the case is not just about that. the cases also about my constituents and the american people. i have truly been touched by the outpouring of support from my constituents in los angeles, and from friends in places like louisiana, texas, missouri, new york, illinois, florida, and even from abroad. i know the way the american people view congress. they hear talks of partisanship, power, money, influenced -- for congressional critics, it is easy to see a report of an ethics case, and completely washed their hands of the top. but, my constituents and supporters have seen the accurate portrayals -- in

accurate portrayals of my work, and they know me better than that. they encouraged me to fight. i will the mets -- i will admit, some question my policy, but no one should question my dedication to public service. i asked to consider the facts of the case and my life's work of try to provide access to those have -- who have been denied. those two things will provide context to my constituents and to your judgment. my constituents demand that i stand up for the value they elected me to represent. for some, no bath -- no benefits, no failure to disclose, in no case. i thank you again for coming today. i am going to ask my chief of staff, who will present to you saw the key facts in the case and will also address some of

our concerns, to come forward. after the presentation, i will be happy to take your questions and answer them to the best of my ability. i will ask it to keep your questions to the sad, and my experience with the process. i will not be entertaining questions about the supposed issue of race, or recent media reports that nothing to do with my case. let me just ask the camera guy on this side, you are distracting me. would you please move back? please? when you're lights go off, it bothers my eyes. please do not stand over on this side. please move back to the front row. i would appreciate it very much.

thank you very much. he is pointed at the podium. -- he is going to take the podium. >> hello. thank you. i cannot see from there. i am sorry. >> ok. so, what we want to do is run through some of the basics of the case, and share information that you might not be aware of at this point that will give you some insight as to why we are at this point, why a settlement has been reached, and why we think congresswoman has a good case. the basics are the question of whether the national bankers

association or one united -- whether or not there was a benefit, assistance, a failure to install -- and trust, where this thing called the creation of an appearance fund. here we have the first letter that was sent by robert cooper, chairman-elect by the national banks association, requested the original meeting from hank paulson here, we have an e-mail from mr. michael grant who is the president of the national banks association, on the morning of the meeting, to bob corker -- bob cooper. one of the questions was whether he was acting as a chairman- elect. here we want to show there was communication between them on the right of the meeting. hear, you see the current chairman of the nba.

this isn't enough to be an -- to the entire nba membership. it is saying to please see an article. bob cooper, in attendance at the meeting, representing the membership and all minority banks, and we will send an update of the outcome. first, let me say as we go through these, all of these documents were produced via of the subpoena of the committee. they have these. they were able to view these. it was part of their decision making process. again, in the "washington post, called that morning, it's as a number of hard-hit banks -- at her request, treasury department officials agreed to meet with

some bank executives today. you have enough for members of the association, the chairman, and the present to bob cooper on the morning of the meeting. hear, -- here, after press reports in march of 2009, you have a press release from the national bank association which reads >> here, was the letter that was sent by the national bankers association, shortly after the meeting, reiterating their purpose for the meeting, and their request for assistance to a broad set of banks in their association. so, now go to the question of the alleged benefit and the preservation of stock via the $12 million of tarp.

>> so, they are saying i did something that directly results in a benefit to one united, and therefore, benefits the congresswoman. >> the first question that folks need to ask is what did a benefit under, and how does the process worked? they clearly benefit of the capital purchase program within

park. in hard to do that, it is a multi-step process. when united had to raise approximately $20 million in private capital, and get a tax deferment, and approval by their federal regulator, which is the fdic, approval by the treasury department, and remember, this is all in the context of the bush should administration. finally, it is clear they did not benefit from section 1036. here is the testimony from the director of resolutions at the fdic. it reads "and they were critically under-capitalized. they're trying to raise capital. they wanted to make sure corrective actions took place." the have to come up with an agreement with state street bank to put 17 million, i believe,

into the institution. these are assets that could be considered capital. skip down to here, where it says then, there was a lot of discussion about tarp money, so we had to put together a case for our board of directors. we presented the case to our board of directors, and we basically recommended they get deferred tax asset waiver. they ask for 48 months, and we said 12 months. actually, we said 12, and they ask for 24. >> the question was asked "were you in favor of this action?" she responds that we do have a responsibility to protect >> what is turning, please?

what is her title? >> she was director of resolutions at that time. to go further, we have done fdic, and now we go to the treasury department. were you have here is correspondence from the deputy assistant secretary for public affairs, at the time of the news articles started coming out. they're trying to figure out how one united got money, and whether or not they benefited under the sections in their claims to have benefited from.

the responses we both have to find transactions under those. >> here, you have correspondence with the treasury department that first dates back -- it starts with the carter administration, but chose an e- mail trail back to the previous administration. -- it starts with the current administration, but goes back to the previous and administration.

>> if you come out here, in the recesses and in all responding to questions. -- you noticed this is an e- mail responding to questions. >> excuse me, can you hold the microphone up a little bit? >> i apologize. we need to hear this. if we need to start over, let me know. let's go to the next question. did the meeting or the appeal by one united contrary to the fact that it was the first community development financial

institution to receive cpp funds. he response did not know about. >> did requests by any member of congress accelerate its consideration or play any role in the decision? they respond, not at all. finally, after we get past all the facts that show there was no influence and there was nothing that was done by our office, we go to caseload from the standards committee. it -- case law from the standards committee. moreover, rep graves punitive interest was held as part of a large class of investors. even if the testimony benefited at the companies in which she

was invested, her personal financial interest in either investment would of been a class of investors and not of individuals. we have asked the investigative subcommittee time and time again, how they treat the investment as a uniquely held investment vs. the investment of the class. >> when did they decide that case? >> about six months ago. this statement was made by the standards committee. another question is around the congresswoman's failure to construct -- consult with chairman frank. the investigative subcommittee neither asked myself nor the congress woman directly whether or not she instructed me to refrain. rep waters testified that it

happens sometime after the tarp bill was floating around congress. we made it clear that chairman frank would allow -- evaluate the suggested problem. they refer to the meeting as happening in early september, as an attempt to try to place the meeting before the action by the congresswoman in order to create this illusion of conflict of interest. here is testimony from the congress woman in front of the investigative subcommittee. did you have discussions about the legislation with you? no, i just said to barney, that is your home. i can't look at it.

when you say "de" are you referring to those at united bank? yes. it was his experience, they had branches all over the area and was headquartered in his district. because he knew more about tarp than i did, it is something i cannot be involved with. did you consider your husband's ownership of stock as a reason to not be involved? >> they were actually asking for money. that may have been one of my motivations to talk to barney frank, that i should be involved in that -- that i should not be involved in that. i did not know or understand the implications of that. if they were asking for money, it was at that point that i realized i should not be included in that. i told barney i could not be involved with that.

those statements are important for two reasons. she says that the recognition of tarp was a reality. in the investment created a conflict. this is testimony from me in front of the investigative subcommittee. at some point during the fall of 2008, did you become aware of the conversation that the congresswoman had with representative frank. i think that what happened after the meeting based on communication and the fact that we had not got results from a survey back, at that time, no other banks had stepped up and said that there is an issue with the fannie and freddie peace. the issue the cumbersome and had was that they were approached by the nba about this. i don't want to be involved with it on this level.

barney said to stay out of its. that he would take over. it was sometime in late september or early october. one of the things that is frustrating to us is that all of the testimony speaks to the fact that the conversation was in late september or early october. there is no evidence that the conversation happened at any time other than that. to the cumbersome and expressed concern? she appeared to be very comfortable that whenever the issue was, barney would take a look at it and make a decision. i'm sorry that this is so small, but it is a recount of the testimony that corroborates that same time line. it also speaks to the fact that the congresswoman and i communicated about the fact

that she had that conversation. how do you place the time line, why did you say that? as we spoke about before, we wanted to understand what the depth of the problem was. here is the correspondence on the seventeenth of september that says that in the folks at a survey, they found a significant exposure to fannie and freddie. on the timber 19, there is an e- mail from me that is a recognition -- they come in and ask for the meeting, but as time went on, it became clear that it was a more narrow issue. you have an e-mail from chairman frank's staff on monday,

september 22 that says we have heard from one of the minority members this morning. moving on to the next question, this is a question of assistance. if you read the motion to deny and our motion to dismiss, it says that the case in the late 60's compared the adoption. the congressman worked for seven years to establish a bank charter on a naval base. he wrote official correspondence to both federal and state regulators, he attended meetings with folks from the bank, he instructed staff to follow up with state and federal regulators. he purchased 2500 shares of stock all without disclosing the whole thing. that is what the subcommittee is

using to compel against the congresswoman. what i want to do is quickly run through what assistance was going on at that time and show that it was happening as mr. frank had already said through his office and compare that to things that have already been outlined. here you have a memo to chairman frank that is a response to a draft letter about united bank and refers to the issue. one other thing i need to point out is that 1 united bank discussed the details last week. they told me that they're going to be monitoring the situation closely. they also said that they met and told me that they did not discuss the problems in depth with that office.

congressman waters name is not mentioned. here you have the letter that they passively agreed to sign on to, to take a look at the bank proposal to redeem gse stock. here you have another correspondence between staff on the full committee and having conversations about the ftse -- fdic. they do not have the authority to implement in be a proposals. -- mba proposals. there is conversation going on about how to solve this problem. the conversation is going on between staffers in the full committee.

further conversation between staffers on the full committee, even if regulatory agencies are willing to be flexible, it is difficult for minority banks. war correspondents. -- more correspondence. i really need guidance on what can be done about the national bankers association proposal. it is a huge priority for our minority caucuses to have had a major concern. the treasury has a statutory responsibility to promote. the secretary indicated he was committed to being helpful. what is important about this, there are clearly conversations going on between committee staff and the treasury department.

in context, they're still talking about mba proposal. hear, he said for me to step in the meeting with paulson and hopefully we can get a commitment from him today. on the twenty second of september, there is an update. i have called the congressional staff a number of times and spoke directly to the chief of staff. the have not been able to get a firm commitment from them to see if they will pursue the proposal. again. here is something i wanted to communicate again. this is the president of the national bankers association

communicating with the chairman of lack about language they would like to see at the proposal in the context of tarp. more correspondence. the ceiling which year that is actually a reflection of language that was worked on by folks in the national bankers association. here on the twenty fourth, you see the proposal that is reflective of the previous language that we showed. it shows there is a cooperative effort to going on to try to figure out how to solve the minority challenges of the depository institution. at this time, also are around the 24, the independent community bankers association became extremely engaged in this issue, saying that up to 22%

hold stock. i just wanted to show that even if we talk about section at one of 36, there were institutions of that size that could be impacted. that was the thinking at the time. let's talk about what has been identified by the committee on my behalf. you have to e-mail's sent to a staffer. we of put that in context. there was a blast that went out from the national bankers association showing the limited number of folks impacted by the trouble. we have an e-mail sent to the chairman a lack of the -- elct of the -- elect of the mba. the committee reads this as if it was something that was sent

to one united. you have to unsolicited e-mail is received with no response. slide. here is the e-mail that i am talking about that was in the standards committee. again, [unintelligible] slide. what it clearly shows is that if everyone remembers in 2008, they can out with a three-page bill that requested seven did that the billion dollars to buy troubled assets. -- $750 billion to buy troubled assets. it was a widely available draft of treasury department bills. finally, let me get to the question of appearance.

also, they said that the standards committee found that no relevant house rule or other standard of conduct prohibits the full creation of an appearance of conflict of interest. the committee also did not identify a house rule that prohibits the creation of an appearance that other members are taking action for a personal benefit. the ethics manual states that the appearance of conflict of interest is only a very narrow circumstance where folks are negotiating for future employment. finally, if you read the motion to deny our motion to dismiss, they cite a case. the committee only misrepresents the reading of this case, and to justify its appearance standard, the only put in half of it. the important part is here. the committee believes that circumstances giving rise to the acceptance of gifts clearly and

convincingly established that his efforts on behalf or received under circumstances which could be construed by reasonable persons as influence of his representational duties. what it said was, because he was convicted of federal bribery statute, it gives the appearance that what he was bribe for was an official act. quickly, the charges because was discredited and for background, what has been used for in the past was a bribery statutes, things of that nature. the second is the spirit of a clause that says you can't have benefits approved. on one side, it says you did something to create a benefit. the other side of is charging

with attempting to do something in charging at the same time. it is an identifiable assistance. no benefit, no improper action, no failure to disclose, and no one influenced. no case. [inaudible] >> thank you very much. i know that this is a lot of information. you have not had access. you have not had access to the enter work -- in our workings of the ethics committee in the past. -- inner workings of the ethics committee in the past. you're probably not aware of the intricacies of this kind of investigation. if someone who is accused simply goes into the back room and

agrees to some violation, even if they have not been guilty of it, it would avoid all of the public press, it would be easy on the committee itself, it means that they don't have to go through a hearing where they have to subpoena people can get more information on the record. it would be easier and convenient for everybody. that is normally how it works. we feel very strongly that we cannot do that. our work has been consistent throughout the history of my career. we have committed no violations, and we are prepared not only to defend myself but to open up the discussion about the prospects. is this process a good one? how does the standards committee work?

the ethics committee, that is. should it be made more fair? all of those questions must be dealt with. we look forward for the opportunity to put some of these ideas forward legislatively. beyond that, my reference to the laws that i created and the reform bill is something that i want you to focus on. the creation of the offices of minority and women somehow got slipped into the bill. they did not get slipped into the bill. the wall street journal did a scathing attack on the fact that i had created these offices so that we could have fair processes for hiring and contracting.

this is what i do. this is what i consider as part of my responsibility as a legislator and as a member of congress. i want to continue to work on the process and help open up the discussion about the process. all of those business persons that we created this year, working with the other members of the congressional black caucus is about that. when you heard me talking about the minority bill, they got cut out of any assistance. we have lost 50% of all of the minority automobile deals. when you hear me talk about the national black broadcasters, they don't get any advertising from government despite the fact that government agencies do a lot of advertising. when you hear me talk about the

national bankers association, the government puts its money into banks. why don't they put money in the minority banks? when you hear me talk about the national securities and professionals on wall street that happen to be people of color, why can't they get consulted for contracts? what is it about this process that excludes folks that are taxpayers that should be involved? the system has not adequately recognized that it is not open and available to everybody. i, as an african-american woman, must be aware of what i can do to open up the system to everybody. this is what it is all about. i am pleased about the opportunity for this discussion. i would never have had all the in the room if this had not taken place.

i'll love for you to have covered the work that i do on a financial services committee. i would love for you to be interested in these issues. i would love for your newspapers and television stations to be interested in this type of work. normally, it is not sexy or interesting enough. i do not get heard. but now, we are in the middle of an investigation, and the discussion is on. i welcome any questions you may have. >> the timeline issue, did they come to the ethics committee and say, we have this case allegedly against you. we want you to take a certain penalty. the debt offer a specific penalty, recommending a reprimand or what the penalty

would be? and at that point you said, no, i just want to understand how we got here. >> in doing what i am doing, and teetering on the border here. you're getting into part of the discussion by the ethics committee that i can't go into any further. what i'm doing now is outside of the box, but i think when you get to that part of it, have to not go any further with that discussion. >> you said earlier that there was a process behind closed doors, and you didn't say the exact words. but there is a take-it-or-leave- it impression. >> i'm saying i won't go behind

closed doors. i won't cut a deal. i will continue to talk about the fact that i have not violated any thing, and they must go to a judicatory hearing if they don't believe me. >> did you or your office do anything to reach out to or communicate with state street for their assistance? >> we don't know who they are. nobody in my office has ever spoken to state street. we have nothing to do with the capital that they got from state street. i even said to investigate it. we had nothing to do with that. we know nothing about it. >> he said he went on the house floor against the recommendation of his lawyers and against the recommendation of his friends.

the speak against the recommendation of lawyers, friends, the leadership? >> i have nothing to do with that case. as i identified in my opening statement, i gave the reasons why i am here. to give you the facts as i know them and as i understand them, to make my case. >> has the leadership encourage you not to do this? >> i have not spoken with any leadership. >> my question pertains to the office of congressional ethics. the intelligence committee is the co-chairman of that, and you had conversations with him in the 1990's over the cia. is it proper for him to be co- chair of the body investigating you? >> it is made up of members of both sides of the aisle appointed by the leadership.

they determine who will sit on that committee. if i had thought about it early on, i might have challenged that. i just didn't think about it. we are people that really do disagree philosophically. >> does the committee give you any clue at all as to why the meeting [inaudible] >> no. i think they just missed doing their work in such a way that they made some assumptions that are just not true. they just missed doing good, investigatory work. i think they just assumed it, i don't know. >> back to the first meeting of the treasury and ask for $50 million, why didn't you get out

of the issue then? do you agree that they used you? >> let me tell you what i understand about the meeting. i was not in the meeting. i understand that the meeting opened up in the way i would have expected a meeting to open up, and why they were going to that meeting, to talk about the plight of minority bankers that had invested their money in fannie and freddie because they felt they were safe places to invest the money, and somehow, those investments were projected or secured by government. i understand at some point he started to talk about one united and raised the information or shared information that he had a $50 million invested, and what did that mean?

was the government going to make it good? that is what i had to stand took place in the meeting. the treasury department said to them that we have no authority to make good any lost investment in preferred stock. it is not written into our law. that meeting was over and done. they got no assistance, and it was over. after that meeting, maybe four weeks later, park came into being -- tarp came into being. separate and apart from the gse question that they had been the treasury about. it was at that point that we said that if this is about one united, first of all, tarp is new and we don't know anything about it.

the chairman of this committee, you talk to them, i am out of it. i just feel that things -- and this is how our government is. things work on a fast pace. where work -- we are in a point in time where the meltdown was going on and conversations go on. oron't think i was fed up use. this is just the way things unfolded. >> were there any red flags when you were thinking, there are past connections to one united? that maybe there'd be a conflict of interest at that point? >> trade associations have representatives.

most trade associations usually have representatives of one of their member companies to speak to them, particularly if they don't have ongoing lobbyists of some sort. not only do these associations use the offices and personnel of various other members, but this is how associations work. i took it for that, and that is who i had a meeting for. >> the focus a lot on the actions of your chief of staff. it seems to indicate an opinion that you are responsible, but is mr. moore under investigation? >> no. >> why do you think not if it revolves around some much of his

actions? >> you would have asked yourself, what did he do? what did he say? did he ask any agency of government for assistance? did he make a telephone call on their behalf? did he write a letter? what did he do? that is probably why there is no investigation. nobody can say that he actually took any action. that is my thinking. >> this may not be the main issue here, but do you feel that the current ethics process should be changed? how should you change it? >> i am not opposed to the ethics process, but there must be due process. for example, i think that you cannot file a claim after a certain date. i think it is designed so that

members would not be accused or set up at the point of reelection. if that is the case, why you have an o.c.e. that can release findings at any point in time as they have done in my case? because once they have held it for a year, they can release it at any time. once they released it and it goes to the ethics committee, what is the responsibility in terms of the time frame? can they say that we want to wrap up our allegations right before you go on break, no members will be around. we don't have enough staff to get through the hearings. you probably won't be heard prior to the election, so those kinds of things must be identified more clearly. must be one that can

be negotiated clearly. >> are there things you would have done differently or things you didn't do that you would do regarding this case? >> no. as you recall, we had a letter from the national bankers association. we had requests from the national bankers association. everybody who have been witnesses in this case said that. the request is from the national bankers association. i stepped forward to say, please meet with these people. i did not suggest what he should do. i did not say to meet with them and solve the problem this way.

i would probably do the same thing. >> msnbc.com found that of the banks that received a bailout, when united have the [unintelligible] october 27, the fdic issued an order saying it was on sound and unsafe banking practices. was there except -- executive compensation? is this the type of paint -- bank that american taxpayers should be bailing out? >> if there is information about a bank that makes them ineligible for being a bank, or if they have some information

that they should be investigated where they can close them down, they ought to do it. if the fdic had information about them that they should have given to me, they should have done it. members don't know how banks are operating. that is why we have regulatory agencies to determine whether or not they are proper or operating under law. if not, they will shut them down. if there is information that they should caution the about because they are investigating or doing something that i should know about, they should tell me. nothing stops them from doing that. >> is it not odd that the weakest bank had a direct relation to your husband? is that not odd? >> i wish i could make this clear to you. i had nothing to do with the regulatory agency and how it operates.

we depend on our regulatory agencies to make decisions about whether are not these banks are acting properly. if they're not, they ought to shut them down. >> on the report, one thing you should recognize is that report was based on data from some timber 30 and does not take into account the $20 million investment. at the time that they applied for the money, they worked at 1.8. they had reasonable capital ratio. >> at one point, you talked to mr. moore about staying out of it. do you have the dates on that? >> i do not want to pretend that i know exactly what i said.

if you look at the testimony in this case, when the witnesses tried to go back and remember everything they said, it comes out in all kinds of different ways. one witness thought that they had done something that they had not really done. i cannot give you the exact words that i said. i can tell you that we have the conversation. i don't know the date. it was after the meeting with barney frank. >> do you have any evidence that the warnings from barney frank or the talks took place in late september? it seems critical to your time line. he says he doesn't remember. he only remembers september. that is sort of incidental to the heart of the case, but it is

part of the case. >> if you can recall, in all of this, what i said the barney frank and the point that i went to him with was the point that tarp became a reality. it was not a reality when the meeting with the treasury took place. it would have to be with some weeks after when it became a discussion. that was one of the reasons i was talking to him. because now they were seeking assistance in a different way. we are looking for other information to confirm that. we think there is perhaps other information. perhaps the staff can help him with that. >> could you reiterate the signs of your husband's investment over that time and how it was

impacted? where it stood in the process? >> i am not sure about the time frames, but i remember that my husband's original investment was about $350,000 or so. i am told that once we started to look at this, his investment in the bank had been reduced to about $179,000 because it was not worth as much because of the financial situation of the bank was not what it had been many originally invested. >> does he still on those shares? >> yes, he does if anybody wants to buy them. >> about the implications for democrats in the elections, you're moving forward and you

want a public hearing. are you concerned about the effect for the party in november? >> there is a lot of speculation about what ever happens on either side of the aisle prior to election. people are speculating who is going to win, how many seats are going to be lost, and as far as i'm concerned, most of it is speculation. i think each member must be concerned that they're representing their constituents, that they are doing the best job that they can possibly do, and that they are not only producing the public policy that the american public expects us to produce, but they are honoring all of a loss and their living by the rule of law. that is all i can tell you. i am not about to try to get into what is a benefits for

either party. i want to deal with the case. >> if i can follow up briefly on that point, you have been critical of the lackadaisical pace of the ethics committee. if this goes past the election, would it be better for your party for someone who knows, yes or no, where this stands? >> any member would be better off to have it resolved as quickly as possible. if there is to be a hearing, it should be done to think it is important for due process to take place. it is guaranteed by something called the constitution. >> what is the most compelling piece of evidence for your case? >> i don't think there is.

for my case? what you will find is this. no one in any regulatory agency, the fdic, the treasury, and no one has said that maxine waters wrote them or talk to them. you'll see the opposite. the persons in these agencies said that we were not influenced by anybody. we have criteria, we judge people by that criteria, and using the criteria, 1 united bank qualify because they were adequately capitalized. i think that is compelling. if you would like to accuse me, what did i do? if you like to accuse my chief of staff, what did he do? i think that is very compelling.

having looked at this case, this business of coming down to, well, we can't find anything that you did or that your chief of staff did, they must not have instructed them. let's get someone who has not spoken. let's go to the back. >> the meeting with the treasury officials, why weren't there any other member banks? >> this question be -- it keeps being asked about why there weren't other member banks, and i try to understand the question because when a trade association comes through washington, or when they send their representatives to washington, they don't usually bring all of their people with them, just

somebody that represents them. when i look at the testimony that basically what the lady said, she said, usually, she talks with representatives of trade associations that represent hundreds of companies. this idea of why there weren't other minority banks is kind of another kind of question and i don't quite get it. >> back to your husband, can he talk about your concerns about this money that was in the bank and had all-important was the investment? >> i have never had any concerns about my husband's investments in the bank. i would never take extraordinary steps to save that amount of money. i had no concerns. >> and did you have concerns --

>> someone who has not spoken. >> [inaudible] >> i believe that if you're going to write about the story, you need to know what you are writing about. some of you have been all over the place in what you know and what you don't know. so i thought it was important for you to get as much information as you can possibly get so at least you can have some basic information based on documents, based on an understanding. there are some people that still don't know the difference between representing an association and representing an individual bank. congresswoman waters, she did not arrange a meeting for one united. she called secretary paulson to

arrange a meeting for a trade association. when paulson responded, he didn't tell anybody i called him and asked for a meeting. he said that she called and said she has got these members of banks who are concerned, they are in town, and they need a meeting. as a matter of fact, i think he said that she never said anything about 1 united bank. i want you to know the difference. that is number one. number two, this business about her or her staff is away get money at the meeting, and it was not in existence. it did not come into existence until later on. the conversation with barney frank took place zero weeks

after -- took place weeks after. those are important facts. it for you to pursue information about -- those are important facts for you to pursue information about. is there something in government that says government has a responsibility to be of assistance to minority banks? when it appears that they are going to be bought up or merged, what have you, that they should be eligible to receive some type of assistance, they want to preserve minority banks. i want to know the financial institutions. these small banks were charged with an irresponsibility for getting money out and communities that don't normally get that money.

i want you to understand the question of access. why is it that bank of america, wells fargo, citi, chase manhattan can get on the telephone and get the treasurer to walk in. why do they have such access? it is not just minority banks. it is community banks that don't have access and complain. i really want you to ask these questions so that when you write your stories, you can have some basis on which to write your stories. i think that is about it. >> the answers to why the specific representative was present at this meeting, you do not know why that occurred. >> mr. bob cooper was the

chairman of the national bankers association. is there legal counsel? who else was there from mba? the outside counsel was there and the chairman alike was there. i think that is all we can do today. we have tried to be as transparent as we can possibly be and afford you the kind of opportunity that you would not normally get in this kind of case. we appreciate your attendance. i will not be holding any interviews outside this room. this is in it. >> i know you are saying this is how trade associations work, they don't get a bunch of their members to come to a meeting, but the fact is, people that were kind of wearing two hats, the conversation centered around ou.

>> you can't define appearance. >> i'm not talking about in terms of the ethics committee saying appearance, and talking about the idea that the conversations on that day revolved around specifically this one bank. isn't that great a problem? >> you forgot what i said. the witness' testimony said that 75 percent of the conversation was about minority banks, about one united entering into the conversation. that is the kind of information to you will get if you read all of this and all the documents that are associated with it. >> tonight on c-span, another chance to see representative maxine waters. she reacts to the house ethics committee investigation into her involvement with 1 united bank in california. that is 8:00 p.m. eastern

tonight on c-span. >> daniel webster used to use it. >> and daniel webster sat here? >> harry truman said that he really despise it. at the time, he was seen as a senator in kansas city. i was wondering if he didn't think at that point that the movie was looking at him and his relationship with the machine back home. >> the senate historian on washington movies and his new book, the u.s. congress, a very short introduction. >> this weekend, columbia university on the state of education in the united states and the effects of stereotypes on learning and testing. afterwards, our view of war as

adults is shaped by how we perceive for at the time of maturity. if former cia agent who still requires his identity be shielded on the deal with iran. and the fall book preview. visit booktv.org. >> homeland security secretary janet napolitano addresses a addressing -- addresses illegal emigration by repealing the fourteenth amendment. we also hear from press secretary robert gates about the upcoming trip to the gulf and other topics. this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> good afternoon and welcome to the white house. before we get started, i have one quick announcement. on sunday, august 29, president

obama will travel to new orleans, louisiana to mark the fifth anniversary of hurricane katrina. the visit will include remarks by the president of the university of louisiana, members of the cabinet that helped to speed recovery efforts in the region. we will have more on that trip as it gets closer. we are joined by joinednapolitano -- by secretary napolitano. the president signed into law a border security bill that puts more agents and more equipment along the mexican border. she is here to talk about that, our efforts to bolster the border region since coming into office, and i will turn it over

to the secretary. >> the afternoon, everybody. thank you for being here today. i was pleased to be with a the president earlier as he signed a bill providing $600 million in additional resources to further strengthen security along the southwest border. we applaud congress for acting in a bipartisan manner to take quick action on this bill. i would like to especially thank leaders reid, pelosi, schumer. there are resources to continue to bolster security along the southwest border, supporting our efforts to crack down on criminal organizations and reduce the trafficking of people, drugs, currency, and weapons. the bill is important in two respects. it adds new resources to the border. it makes permanent many of the assets that this administration

has surged along the border along the past 18 months. let me pause there for a moment. i have worked on border issues as a public servant for 17 years starting in 1993 as a state attorney in arizona, then the attorney general of arizona, then the governor of arizona continuing through today as the secretary of homeland's security. what is significant about this bill, in addition to its contents, it passed something with bipartisan support that gives us the resources to continue efforts that are well under way, and demonstrates that the border is not and should not be a political issue. it is a matter of national security in which both parties have a stake. on that score, even before the

president signed this bill, the administration devoted more resources to the southwest border than any point in american history. these efforts are making a difference, and they are the reason why everything that is supposed to be going up is going up, and everything that is supposed to be going down is going down. seizures are up across the board last year. apprehensions for illegal crossings are down. criminal alien removals are at an all-time high. we have had at -- added more technology and resources to the border than ever before. this is a long term, systematic effort to defeat the cartel and continue to secure the border. the administration is dedicated to that approach. that is why the president

ordered 1200 guard troops to the border. now, the bill. in terms of manpower, it provides for 1000 additional border patrol agents. it contains $68 million for border protection officers at our port of entry, facilitating legal traffic. it enables emigration customs enforcement to hire more than 200 special agent investigators and intelligence people. it provides for unmanned aircraft systems and has $14 million to deploy improved tactical communications technology that will improve enforcement, particularly along some of the more remote areas of the border. it also includes $196 million for the justice department for federal law enforcement,

immigration judges, and support the detention and incarceration of criminal aliens in coordination with the homeland security enforcement efforts. it includes $6 million for 24 operating basis to improve our border enforcement activities. this bill is clearly another step forward on border security on top of the significant progress that the administration has already made. it is one of the many tools in the tool box that we have constructed along the border. we're very pleased with the swift passage. very pleased to the president was able to sign this bill into law today. i am happy to take your questions. >> when the president spoke about emigration last month, he said at our borders are just to ovast -- [inaudible]

as long as our limited resources are devoted, also the hundreds of thousands -- did the administration conceded that comprehensive immigration reform is not tenable and that you can fix this problem bill by bill? >> i would say quite the opposite. the administration's position is that this bill adds to significant efforts that have been underway for the past 18 months. the administration is very intense now on saying, look, this bill passed on a bipartisan basis. with the republicans to the table so that we can address the issue of immigration reform. these are things that should be done together. >> having gotten this piece and a comprehensive reform, is it

still something that can happen in the next several years? >> as someone with a lot of experience with immigration issues, we need a safe and secure border. this is and -- this involves a lot of tourism, trade, people who need fourthable to go back and giv and need to be secure. >> as the president has talked about this and i have mentioned, the president has worked on this since 2005, 2006, and two dozen 7, as a member of the united states senate. leaders and the senate may tough decisions and a tough vote to get a bill because democrats and republicans worked together. nothing is going to happen on this issue in a comprehensive way that only involves one party or one person.

secretary napolitano's home state had leaders that were willing to make tough votes, willing to roll up their sleeves and be leaders. the question is -- we will get comprehensive immigration reform when we go back to a time in which both democrats and republicans are willing to be leaders, and only then. it is not going to go to the senate, house, or congress, and come to any president's desk because one party has willed it to do so. and i guess that is my point. they're always -- >> i guess that is my point. there always seemed to be support for securing the border. how does this differ from that? >> i think the efforts on overall immigration reform are ongoing. the point i am making is that you need to multitask.

secure the border and have a safe and secure border, and you need immigration reform. that is what this president has set out to do. that is what he has asked the department of homeland security to work on. that is why he has invited republicans in the republican leadership to the table and said, look, let's get to this immigration of immigration reform -- issue of immigration reform. we want to make sure that 2,000 miles expands is safe and secure. >> i am wondering if you can talk more specifically about the president's timetable for bringing about comprehensive time -- province of immigration reform. how much will this focus on the outcome of the november election? >> i think the purpose of our briefing here today is to talk about this bill. its significance. the fact that it passed on a

bipartisan fashion and very swiftly. the president made a formal request for the supplemental funding in june. we're now -- we have already begun moving resources, in addition to what we had put at the border, to the border. this will allow us to make some of those movements permanent. the addition of 1000 more border patrol agents on top of the 20,000 we already have is again evident. 200 more i.c.e. agents that we can devote to special investigations. that is very significant. unmanned aerial systems to add to the ones we already have along with the fiske -- fixed wings and helicopters we have allows for 24/7 security. when you add everything together, this is a very comprehensive package. >> what is the timetable -- now

that you have this bill, which is again evident and lays groundwork for comprehensive immigration reform -- what is the timetable for the next step and how much is a contingent on the next election? >> the president has said from the beginning that immigration reform is a priority for him. he has reiterated that at the speech at american university, which you were quoting from. he has invited congress to the table. as was said earlier, this is in the hands of the congress. they will need to address this in a bipartisan way. it cannot only be done by democrats. republicans must be willing to come to the table. the timetable question should be addressed to them. them and nobody has suggested that i have heard -- >> nobody has suggested, that i have heard, that only one step needs to be taken to have comprehensive immigration reform. this is an aspect of it and some that we always mentioned. there are other aspects that are

needed and that people are interested in doing. mr. precedent has -- president has reached out and talk to democrats and republicans on this issue. we just need a little support to make it happen. >> if you do not get those other aspects, comprehensive reform, is it not just a drop in the bucket in attacking this problem? >> no. i would say this again, as someone who has governed a border state, the border region is an important and critical area for this country. so much commerce and trade happens there. bill will live in communities -- people live in communities in that border region and we wanted to be safe and secure. that requires a law enforcement in approach -- including infrastructure, technology. this bill, added to what we've done, gives us the resources

necessary for that kind of system to be in place. that makes a lot of difference for people who live in that area and for the country as a whole. >> you have mentioned that crossings are down. can you talk more about that in terms of numbers and whether you think that as a result of the economy? there are not enough jobs for people to want to cross the border. to what degree is it because of specific measures taken by the administration? >> we cannot give you specific numbers. i can tell you from my own experience that crossings are down, i would have to save 50% or 60% from even a few years ago. >> almost all of that is from the economy? >> it is fair to say the economy has something to do with it. it is also fair to say the additional law enforcement resources at the border have also had something to do with it. there is another factor that should be taken account -- taken

into account. we have undertaken an unprecedented partnership with the calderon administration, law enforcement on the southern side of the border. that is also having an effect. can you quantify what this extra money -- >> can you quantify what this extra money and resources is going to mean in percentages? >> what is the question? and you said you were trying to limit drug cartels -- >> you said you're trying to limit drug cartels. how much effect will this have on that? can you quantify it in numbers or percentages ? >> it is difficult to quantify. we can give you numbers on how much profits have gone down and seizures have gone up. that will give you some dimension. >> critics might say you are throwing this in, doing this for

political show to lay the groundwork for november, in order to lay the work or the predicate for pursuing comprehensive reform at some people in the future. what effect will this actually have? that is the genesis of the question. >> you will see crossings continue to go down. usc seizures going up. i cannot give you an example number. the resources are in place. you will see crime rates along the border either remain stable or keep going down, so that border communities are safer because of this money. there are many ways to look at it. i will look at all of those factors. >> follow up on an earlier question about the timing of comprehensive reform. is it safe to say that the policy pieces -- i know you say it is not sequential -- but those are being put in place and now it is simply a political problem to get reform after congress? >> i think it is fair to say

that it is time for immigration reform, that the administration is ready to invite the congress to get at it. again, as gibbs just said, it cannot be just one party. the republican leadership needs to come to the table. >> as you know, republicans in washington say that, while this 1200 national guard troops is helpful and the money is helpful, it is nowhere near enough. do you agree that more is needed, or do you think we have the resources we need to do the job? >> i think this bill matches very well with what the president asked for in june. it augments what we have party been doing. we haveg in march, 2009 -- been moving resources to the southwest border. this allows us to make some of those resources permanent, not

temporary. i believe that we have designed -- what needs to happen at this border, we have a good idea of what it takes to keep the border safe and secure, and we will send money to be able to do that. it shows that when congress acts in a bipartisan fashion, even on a complicated issue -- and border security is a complicated issue -- other issues they have addressed in a bipartisan fashion. when they do it, things can move quickly. >> i am sorry. how are you responding to my question? is this enough or is more needed to do the job that thinks -- that you think needs to be done? >> what we asked for is what we thought would be enough. >> do you know how long it takes for 1500 more agents to be hired, trained, and get on the job? >> the average time for border patrol agent to go from hiring, training, to boost on the ground is eight months.

>> once you get all of these in place, you feel you have a long- term stabilization -- is that gap widening between the border security and the more political issue on the other side of what to do with the illegal aliens who are in the united states now? is that not a problem that -- with the lawsuits that are out there -- is that becoming farther and farther from the possibility, not only this year but next? but again, that goes to the issue of underlying immigration reform -- >> again, that goes to the question of underlying immigration reform. we have set forward information for o/c/e/ = = i.c.e. on who they should focus on. we have directed them to focus on criminal aliens. record numbers are being removed

from our country. we will focus on a gang members -- on gang members and felony fugitives. the numbers i numbers i.c.e. - numbers show that i.c.e. has made against rides. >> [unintelligible] there is a compnay -- company doing business india. the bill says that it will be paid by those who [unintelligible] affect theight

u.s./india relationship. >> i think the method of payment, an increased visa charge for some business-related makes a lot of sense. what it says is we're going to make sure we pay for immigration. we have paid for it out of the visa system. that way it does not come out of the general fund which is necessary for so many other things. if the senate could find a way to fund this without adding to the deficit and still get the enforcement moneys we need on a permanent basis. >> does this affect countries doing business in india? >> this administration has a very close relationship with india.

we hope to sustain that as such trips -- as such. >> there is concern about the temporary worker program. the head of the national urban league is concerned that there needs to be more accountability in the process of training, just in case there are companies that need to go out of state -- the states. there needs to be accountability -- making sure they have exhausted all avenues for that. -- before that. >> i think we are all concerned and focused on making sure, in the business side of the immigration process, that the rules are followed and enforced, and that jobs are not unfairly

excluded from american workers. that is our directive. >> that might be a directive, but what kind of teeth are you putting into it. what kind accountability is there to make sure businesses are acknowledging every measure they can to make sure that no one who needs a job in the united states goes out to mexico to hire? >> we could give you a separate briefing. a lot of go-een backs on visas to make sure the rules are being followed. >> he has been working on this issue. you were talking about the need for republicans to come to the table. if the administration reaching out? >> the administration has reached out to a number of senators, including senator

gramm. we recognize this issue is not going away. immigration needs to be addressed, even as we secure the border. yes, the administration has reached out to republican leadership and others, including senator gramm. >> as the indicated that he would be willing to work with you on something? >> the cosigned an op-ed with senator schumer. together, they, because of where they sit in the judiciary committee structure, have a key role to play on whether an immigration bill could move to the senate. that op-ed, which the president has endorsed, laid out a framework for the immigration bill. >> that was a while ago. >> it indeed. -- >> indeed. i see no signs that there are changes and senator gramm's position. -- changes in senator gramm's

position. >> last week, after a nun was killed, you asked for an investigation that i.c.e. released the suspect in 2008. what questions are you hoping that investigation will answer? >> the review is not complete and i do not have a completion date. we are tracking it out of our headquarters. i think we want to know the same thing that the public wants to know. why was this individual, who had to could be you i's -- had two dui's in his past, out on the road? we want to know why the directives, which should make sure something like this would not happen, were not followed. >> is this public or internal? >> let me not into that prematurely. i don't know whether there is --

that would compromise an ongoing investigation. to the extent we can make things public, we accident in -- we absolutely want to. >> thank you madame secretary -- thank you, madame secretary. i note -- the number of republicans have indicated they would be and warmer towards a comprehensive immigration package is more was being done on the fence. was more money put in for the fence along the border? what is its status right now? >> the fence -- there is not money in here specifically for the fence, in the supplemental. we have built up a fence -- minus about 6 miles -- it has received appropriations. in our view, the offense is there. the fence is only part of this.

as i said, i think, famously, when i was a governor, they showed me a 15-foot fence and i'll show you a 16-foot ladder. you have to have the manpower to back it up. >> you're saying the offense is 6 miles short of completion? >> from the amount that was appropriated. to me, that seems mild. i may be corrected. i believe almost all of that is in litigation. >> can you talk about money in the bill for incarceration and prosecution? it that record deportation of criminal straining your existing resources? >> it is fair to say, yes, it was. one of the things about this that is an evident is that it recognizes this is a system that crosses federal departments. if you're going to increase

efforts on border security, if you are going to increase efforts on moving in deporting criminal aliens and the like, you need more on the pension side, the immigration side, the u.s. attorney side, with $196 million in here for the justice department. >> secretary napolitano. can you weigh in on the 14th amendment controversy before congress right now? is it remotely practicable to support -- i do not know. what do you make of that from an immigration perspective? boarded united states -- born in the united states. are you surprised that senator gramm is one of the only ones to debate this issue? >> i have to tell you, i am

surprised, to say the least, that discussion is being had about amending the united states constitution before we even get to the table on an amending statutes that actually carry out immigration policy. that is where the action needs to be. any talk of amending the commerce -- the constitution is wrong. i think it is just wrong. >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> have you discussed that with the president? >> and linda spoke on this a couple of days ago after having discussed this with the -- i think i spoke on this a couple of days ago after having discussed this with the president. the president and secretary napolitano agreed. the 14th amendment in shrines and has more than 150 years people productions and due process. those are two things that we do not think need to be tampered with.

the secretary has pointed out that the process for amending the constitution takes a long time. with a little leadership, we could have comprehensive immigration reform. it is always interesting that -- i said this the other day -- those that have, with steadfast fidelity, talked about not tamper with our constitution, have announced worked to pick the -- this work -- have now swerved to pick the 14th amendment as the best place to address concert -- a grou immigration reform. >> governor brewer has said the federal government is not doing its job. do you see this legislation as an heir to to that? when -- as an answer to that?

>> i will take that two ways. her factual premise was wrong. the fact are the facts. the facts are that there are more border patrol agents than ever before. there is more infrastructure at the border before in -- than ever before. more air cover, more technology. the results are that illegal crossings are way down. seizures of drugs, guns, and cashed our way up. -- cash are way up. she said it -- she posits that the federal government had ignored arizona and i think that was inaccurate and unfair. we will contain it augment the resources we have been putting into arizona, particularly the east side of the state, known as the tucson sector.

when i was the u.s. attorney, i supervised the prosecution of at least 6000 immigration felonies, so this is an area i know quite well. i will tell you there has never been a greater federal presence at this border. the factual premise was wrong. i did meet with governor brewer in boston during the nbga. we discussed all the things we're doing at the arizona border. it was a professional and cordial conversation. >> madame secretary, the republicans along the way have said that -- you have listed a number of steps the administration have taken to my question is, first of all, how will the administration respond? there are republicans saying this is an important first step but more has to be done. the question is, when will the

border be secure? who will certify that the border is secured, if that is what is needed to get comprehensive immigration reform? >> this is more than a first that. i go back to march, 2009, when we began moving assets and resources down into the southwest border. i disagree with that characteristic. secondly, as i have said before, this is the great bill for us. it adds 1000 border patrol agents, i.c.e. agents, air cover, technology. it updates are technical -- our communication technology. the corrado cell phone towers. you need the communications capacity. -- there are no cell phone powers down there. you need the communications capacity. that part is there.

i would simply saying that, sometimes, i hear secure and the border and the gulf coast -- i hear all of these things. i say, look, we will continue to do everything we need to do to have a safe and secure southwest border. we will do everything we need to do to work with county is along the border. ee have the secures -- that secure communities program. our efforts will be informed by good intelligence and analysis so that we're not just throwing money at the border. but that should not be used anymore to preclude the discussions about immigration reform. these should not be sequential. they should go together. >> yes sir. >> the are limited in the number of deportations they can do per year because of limited

resources. the second question -- [unintelligible] what is your reaction? >> i think we will probably see more deportations, particularly in the priority categories i have set forth. can i give you a number yet? no. it would be premature. obviously, our goal is to make best and sufficient use of the money that we get into focus it on where we think the best efforts ought to be. that is, making sure we remove from our country, a criminal aliens, the relatives -- felony fugitives, and gang members once they have served their senses -- their sentences. for those who suggest that this bill is -- what phrase did you

use? >> that by passing this bill all along that radical has hijacked the debate and pulled it more. >> that is just wrong. i think this bill is -- the president asked for this. he asked for it because we know that we can make good use of these moneys for permanent and consistent, across-the-border security. that is what we want to have. that should not be registered to suggest or imply or in any way back off from the fact that we also need immigration reform. >> [inaudible] for example, the operations, the agents, the controversy.

do you agree these measures are still needed? >> operation streamline has proven effective in some places where it has been used. it is very expensive. there are other methods that have proven equally effective. you are trying to make the best use of taxpayer dollars to make sure they are targeted where they can do the best. streamline is one way. other ways have also proven effective. we need different tools in our toolbox. it is a mistake to focus on any single one and say, if you don't have that tool or system. we have a good tool box and a good system. with this money, again, passed with the support of senators mccain and jon kwe